These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A proposal for FW
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#61 - 2013-06-01 01:59:32 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:

So why was it abandoned?
Because of tech moon.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#62 - 2013-06-01 02:25:01 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:
But people also had to care about 80% of the systems if they wanted a very profitable cashout. So the system itself did make militias care about the vast majority of systems. Perhaps just once every 3 months for a push but at least it happened occassionally. Now no one ever cares about anything but home systems that are won by getting the biggest blob.
People currently have to care about 80% of the systems if they want a very profitable farming activity.



No they don't. Getting the extra systems won't make the lp they already have worth more. It will just help people who run plexes after they did the work. So everyone is pretty much fine with sticking at tier 2 or 3 ish. The cashout system created a pressure from everyone in the militia to push to get the systems to get a cashout done. That no longer exists. Now its just a matter of holding 4-5 home systems and other than that its just random pvp.


X Gallentius wrote:

Your argument is that people "cared" about 80% of the systems for one day every three months. That's only about 1% of the way towards your FW Utopia where everybody cares about every system all day long. Surely you can do better.


It was more than one day of work to accomplish a tier 5 cashout. It took months of coodination and work.

X Gallentius wrote:

You never participated in the mass-flipping of 70+ systems. If you did, then you wouldn't keep bringing it up as "the good old days".


I'm not saying inferno was good old days. Inferno had plenty of problems (too much isk, too much of a pve mechanic, unbalanced etc etc) but the actual cashout system was not the issue.

The mechanics of bunker busting are a different issue. They actually haven't changed. They still have just as much ehp. Its just that no one really cares about systems so much so no one does the bunker busting as much now.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#63 - 2013-06-01 02:31:24 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
One of the things that has frustrated me as of late was the abandonment of the temporary cyno jammer......
So why was it abandoned? There are nullsec groups that have enough isk to replace their supercap fleet three times over. Was this item really such a threat to them that they needed to be coddled? ,....



My issue is that I don't think fw players need even safer gate camps.

Other than safer gate camping what would this provide to militias?

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
#64 - 2013-06-01 02:52:58 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
One of the things that has frustrated me as of late was the abandonment of the temporary cyno jammer......
So why was it abandoned? There are nullsec groups that have enough isk to replace their supercap fleet three times over. Was this item really such a threat to them that they needed to be coddled? ,....



My issue is that I don't think fw players need even safer gate camps.

Other than safer gate camping what would this provide to militias?



I put in my post what I thought the use would have been. As proposed the things would have cost 100m isk, only worked for an hour, and taken so long to turn on that you couldn't create an impromptu ambush around it. (One hour setup if I remember correctly). **** blocking null sec alliances from saving or defending moon POS was the ONLY thing you could use them for. Gate camping? Really?!?

Your post is so bizarre that I don't think you read my post or are familiar with the proposed FW cyno jammer at all.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#65 - 2013-06-01 03:13:37 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
One of the things that has frustrated me as of late was the abandonment of the temporary cyno jammer......
So why was it abandoned? There are nullsec groups that have enough isk to replace their supercap fleet three times over. Was this item really such a threat to them that they needed to be coddled? ,....



My issue is that I don't think fw players need even safer gate camps.

Other than safer gate camping what would this provide to militias?



I put in my post what I thought the use would have been. As proposed the things would have cost 100m isk, only worked for an hour, and taken so long to turn on that you couldn't create an impromptu ambush around it. (One hour setup if I remember correctly). **** blocking null sec alliances from saving or defending moon POS was the ONLY thing you could use them for. Gate camping? Really?!?

Your post is so bizarre that I don't think you read my post or are familiar with the proposed FW cyno jammer at all.



I don't recall ccp suggesting such restrictions on the idea. (I may have missed it though) But if there were such restrictions I think it might be a good idea. I don't think it will be a big deal but a small improvement.

It would disadvantage the losing side from using poses to avoid the no docking rule. But I guess no one cares about fw sov enough for that to mean anything.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Liamn
Atrum Deus Vult
#66 - 2013-06-01 08:49:34 UTC
Why can't we tweak it so:


  1. Remove LP gain from plex mechanics
  2. Add LP gained to PVP kill: same formula as today + a multiplier based on FW tier level, each level being 1000 LP (or whatever number)

    3. Example: My FW tier level is 2. My fleet (myself if solo) kills a T1 cruiser. My LP reward would be: same formula as today + 2000 LP

  3. Station lockout at system upgrade 5 (if you really want meaning, need to keep working for it)
  4. Cyno jammers capability at FW tier 3 or above (keep null-sec from interfering all the time)

Those of you who say FW is fine right now do not know how it used to be.
There was always the frig fights for newbie pilots.
I miss the usual bc roams, and the occasional 60 on 60 BS fights. Those farmers will never be able to bring that to the table.
David Devant
CTRL-Q
Ushra'Khan
#67 - 2013-06-01 10:27:19 UTC
Liamn wrote:
Why can't we tweak it so:


  1. Remove LP gain from plex mechanics
  2. Add LP gained to PVP kill: same formula as today + a multiplier based on FW tier level, each level being 1000 LP (or whatever number)

    3. Example: My FW tier level is 2. My fleet (myself if solo) kills a T1 cruiser. My LP reward would be: same formula as today + 2000 LP

  3. Station lockout at system upgrade 5 (if you really want meaning, need to keep working for it)
  4. Cyno jammers capability at FW tier 3 or above (keep null-sec from interfering all the time)

Those of you who say FW is fine right now do not know how it used to be.
There was always the frig fights for newbie pilots.
I miss the usual bc roams, and the occasional 60 on 60 BS fights. Those farmers will never be able to bring that to the table.


Ah the good old days...

I like it as it is now really, but do miss those big fights.

I think LP for kills would have some weird economic implications that only Samantha Morton's character in Cosmopolis could work out.

Jammers yes, far too easy for null to project power, if they want it they should have to commit time and effort.
ALUCARD 1208
Digital Ghosts
Nourv Gate Security Commission
#68 - 2013-06-01 14:42:07 UTC  |  Edited by: ALUCARD 1208
cearain wrote:

It was more than one day of work to accomplish a tier 5 cashout. It took months of coodination and work.



I dont know were you get that assumption from even scrubs shouting for upgrades in militia chat in minnie mill could cause a panic spike to T5 if the systems were there to upgrade..... I even did it with a calmil alt once which made bolsterbomb very angry because all his guys wernt on to get full benefit of the spike he raged,...... i laughed Lol.....

BEBOPS ODE TO PERUNGA
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#69 - 2013-06-03 13:46:53 UTC
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:
cearain wrote:

It was more than one day of work to accomplish a tier 5 cashout. It took months of coodination and work.



I dont know were you get that assumption from even scrubs shouting for upgrades in militia chat in minnie mill could cause a panic spike to T5 if the systems were there to upgrade..... I even did it with a calmil alt once which made bolsterbomb very angry because all his guys wernt on to get full benefit of the spike he raged,...... i laughed Lol.....


You had to have sov in 80% of systems to hit a tier 5 cashout.

No one rages about tiers anymore because no one cares.

With a cashout system the work you did to help your militia reach a higher tier benefited you. Now the work you do to help your militia reach a higher tier benefits the parasites who join your militia after you did the work. They then devalue your lp.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#70 - 2013-06-03 15:22:56 UTC
Cearain wrote:
It was more than one day of work to accomplish a tier 5 cashout. It took months of coodination and work.
No it didn't. Maybe months of coordination (consisting of 5 words repeated for three months : "Guys, don't flip systems yet"), but not work. The farmers did all the work.

Quote:

I'm not saying inferno was good old days. Inferno had plenty of problems (too much isk, too much of a pve mechanic, unbalanced etc etc) but the actual cashout system was not the issue.

The cashout system was utter, complete BS. You would know this if you had actually participated in the mass flipping of systems.

The current system makes more sense: You get paid handsomely for controlling a large number of systems over time.

The former system does not: Your militia pays you handsomely for controlling a large number of systems for a couple days every 3 months.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#71 - 2013-06-03 16:16:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:
It was more than one day of work to accomplish a tier 5 cashout. It took months of coodination and work.
No it didn't. Maybe months of coordination (consisting of 5 words repeated for three months : "Guys, don't flip systems yet"), but not work. The farmers did all the work.


The amount of impact that farmers have has nothing to do with cashout versus upfront pay. It has to do with the amount of pay and the risk/reward of plexing.

Lack of coodination was to some extent why amarr only hit tier 4. Nulli kept plexing todifraun to 6 billion % contested instead of moving to other systems. There used to be lots of blogs and posts about strategies and counter strategies. Now? There are none - very few even care about tiers.

Quote:

I'm not saying inferno was good old days. Inferno had plenty of problems (too much isk, too much of a pve mechanic, unbalanced etc etc) but the actual cashout system was not the issue.

The cashout system was utter, complete BS. You would know this if you had actually participated in the mass flipping of systems. [/quote]

Again systems are still flipped in the same way they were before 10/22/12. That hasn't changed. This was already stated above - perhaps you missed it.

X Gallentius wrote:

The current system makes more sense: You get paid handsomely for controlling a large number of systems over time.

The former system does not: Your militia pays you handsomely for controlling a large number of systems for a couple days every 3 months.


Which makes more sense, depends on what you want.

The current system makes sense if you want a slow stagnant war. The cashout system makes sense if you want a dynamic war. I think a slow stagnant war makes more sense for null sec. They have more on the line.

But fw, which involves essentially joining an npc alliance, should have a more dynamic play. Since fortunes could shift every 3 months there is no reason to join the winnings side. (If thats too short, it could easilly be made longer by giving less vp per plex)

Now Amarr gets a higher tier and now all the farmers come over and reap the benefits of their work. The current system rewards fair weather players who just have alts jump from one miltia to another. Cashout mechanics are geared to benefit players who are willing to stick it out with a militia.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#72 - 2013-06-03 16:34:43 UTC
Cearain wrote:

Lack of coodination was to some extent why amarr only hit tier 4. Nulli kept plexing todifraun to 6 billion % contested instead of moving to other systems. There used to be lots of blogs and posts about strategies and counter strategies. Now? There are none - very few even care about tiers.

Gallente was well-coordinated and did not hit Tier V in a few cases. Again, you don't know the real reason why we were only able to hit Tier IV.

If nobody cares about tiers, then why are IHUBS being bashed almost every day in FW?
Princess Nexxala
Zero Syndicate
#73 - 2013-06-03 18:35:29 UTC
Not actually... Nulli got farmed big time and decided to cash out early and bail.

And if it wasn't for Nulli Amarr would of never even sniffed T5.

Cearain wrote:
Lack of coodination was to some extent why amarr only hit tier 4. Nulli kept plexing todifraun to 6 billion % contested instead of moving to other systems.

nom nom
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#74 - 2013-06-03 18:50:53 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Lack of coodination was to some extent why amarr only hit tier 4. Nulli kept plexing todifraun to 6 billion % contested instead of moving to other systems. There used to be lots of blogs and posts about strategies and counter strategies. Now? There are none - very few even care about tiers.

Gallente was well-coordinated and did not hit Tier V in a few cases. Again, you don't know the real reason why we were only able to hit Tier IV. ?


The cashout system was in effect for 5 months. Getting a tier 5 cashout involved several different steps. But it was goal that the militias could get excited about as it was a big payday. (yes it was too big of a payday and needed to be toned down a bit - that I agree with.)

I think there were various reasons why gallente only hit tier 5 1 time. If you want to be more specific as to what you think the issue was I am confident I can offer a fairly easy way the cashout system could have been tweaked to help.

The fact is the cashout system was not fully played out. People speculated that busting enemy bunkers would help but that was never really demonstrated to be the case. After all it was gallente who was doing that the most. Meanwhile the caldari where hitting tier 5 cashouts. Minmatar the most successful militia under that system only did that in a single system and it backfired for them.

CCP just did a hamfisted change instead of trying to analyze what was good and bad about inferno. Some of the changes after inferno were good some were bad. On the whole they may be slowly improving it but if they really analyzed what they were doing things they would make much better progress.


Vyktor Abyss and I agree on very little But we do agree on this that he posted in response to the October 22nd changes:

Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Edit: Just wanted to re-iterate that the main issue all these changes will have is that they will massively stagnate the already pretty stagnant warzones (as many other long term FW players have spotted). Nothing is changing here to make the warzone more PVP related as it all still revolves around boring PVE button orbiting.


And we agree here:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:

The problem has been the lack of time and forethought CCP has put into developing FW. They repeatedly 'started over' and although it is possibly better than it was a few years ago, FW is still suffering from the same core problems.


They really didn't need to completely replace the cashout system with the new stagnation system. They could have analyzed it and tweaked it so it wasn't broken.

The cashout system had lots of things that needed to be fixed but it was much more exciting than this. CCP should have spent the time focusing on the core problems with fw instead of completely reinventing a new tier system.



X Gallentius wrote:

If nobody cares about tiers, then why are IHUBS being bashed almost every day in FW?


I think I said very few care about tiers. I guess I should say very few in fw for something other than the placement of farming alts care. Sure the alt farmers care - well they care enough to log in with their caldari/amarr alt instead of their gallente/minmatar alt. If they tweaked the cashout system to work properly there would never be a need to have farmer alts jumping from one faction to another.

Bottom line: the interest in tiers is nothing close to what we saw with the cashout system.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#75 - 2013-06-03 19:04:06 UTC
Princess Nexxala wrote:
Not actually... Nulli got farmed big time and decided to cash out early and bail.

And if it wasn't for Nulli Amarr would of never even sniffed T5.

Cearain wrote:
Lack of coodination was to some extent why amarr only hit tier 4. Nulli kept plexing todifraun to 6 billion % contested instead of moving to other systems.




For at least a week before they left they had todifraun and its cluster vulnerable way past 100%. Yet they never moved on to other systems. They just stayed grouped there farming vulnerable systems. I doubt any nulli leadership ever told their players to start plexing non vulnerable systems. (But I am not sure of this)

Before Nulli even joined, Amarr were systematically making systems vulnerable or very close to it. This is because we did in fact stop immediately flipping systems and started racking up several systems vulnerable. The minmatar tactic of plexing after amarr leaves for no lp was starting to wear thin and we were making steady progress. We did this despite the fact that amarr was at the time very low on numbers of pilots.

Whether we would have hit tier 5 without nulli is questionable. But depending on what bogged us down the system could have been tweaked. Clearly though we could have hit tier 4 without nulli.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#76 - 2013-06-03 20:02:57 UTC
Cearain wrote:
The minmatar tactic of plexing after amarr leaves for no lp was starting to wear thin and we were making steady progress.
Minmatar log in amarr alts and flip system for you. This was the type of moronic game play that the previous moronic system encouraged.


Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#77 - 2013-06-03 20:56:31 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:
The minmatar tactic of plexing after amarr leaves for no lp was starting to wear thin and we were making steady progress.
Minmatar log in amarr alts and flip system for you. This was the type of moronic game play that the previous moronic system encouraged.



It may have been moronic game play, but it wasn't encouraged by the system. Minmatar did that one time and it backfired. That system was one of the systems that we included in our tier 4 cashout. Other than that they did not use that "moronic" tactic.


I think you and crosi were talking about how gallente used that tactic quite a bit. But then again caldari hit tier 5 the second most often after minmatar. I'm sure you would never admit it may have backfired for you. But that reminds me, you never told me what you thought gallente's problems were for hitting tier 5 cashouts.


Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#78 - 2013-06-03 20:59:55 UTC
Cearain wrote:
It may have been moronic game play, but it wasn't encouraged by the system.

Yes it was. You flip system for the other side so you can farm it back and keep them at below Tier V. But it's good that you agree that such things are moronic, and that systems that encourage such behavior are moronic as well, and that people shouldn't encourage devs to implement things that result in moronic game play.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#79 - 2013-06-03 21:45:21 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Cearain wrote:
It may have been moronic game play, but it wasn't encouraged by the system.

Yes it was. You flip system for the other side so you can farm it back and keep them at below Tier V. But it's good that you agree that such things are moronic, and that systems that encourage such behavior are moronic as well, and that people shouldn't encourage devs to implement things that result in moronic game play.



Again the minmatar were the most successfull militia during this play and they never used this tactic to good effect. They flipped one system and it backfired on them because amarr simply used that system in their tier 4 cashout.

You and crosi were saying gallente used this tactic allot, but then again you admitted gallente had trouble hitting tier 5. Caldari had several tier 5 cashouts.

This tactic was talked about by people who wanted fw dumbed down, but it was never actually proven to be effective in the game.

Because it was never proven to be effective most militias did not even begin to do things which would mitigate its potential effectiveness. For example they could gradually contest all the systems at once instead of plexing one to vulnerable immediately and then moving on to the next. This would mean the enemy militia would also have to plex for you as well as bunker bust if they wanted to throw off your timing.


But if for whatever reason that became a regularly used tactic of the militia that was really doing well under the system, (big "if") there were simple tweaks that would have reduced its effectiveness. E.g., they could have had a cool down period after a system flips where no plexes would spawn in that system. This combined with coodinated plexing where militias gradually increased the contested status of all the systems instead of just bringing one vulnerable right away, would mean this tactic would almost certainly backfire.

As said instead of doing some thinking about the system and doing tweaks where it was needed ccp just started over with faction war tiers and replaced the cashout system with a worse one. Players told ccp and hans the new tier system would be stagnant, ccp and hans ignored them and implemented it anyway. Now the system is so simple minded, and stagnant that strategizing about how to reach tiers is no longer even a topic of discussion. Nor does anyone ever care about sov in 90% of the systems.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#80 - 2013-06-03 21:51:23 UTC
Cearain wrote:

As said instead of doing some thinking about the system and doing tweaks where it was needed ccp just started over with faction war tiers and replaced the cashout system with a worse one.

The current system is superior - at least in the opinion of everybody who is in FW except you. You, on the other hand, are not in FW.