These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fix Warzone control for FW

Author
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#1 - 2014-01-25 13:26:13 UTC
Please fix the Warzone Control Percentage for factional warfare to be reflected by simply the number of systems owned in the warzone. It would be in line with the current intention of system capturing, make the gorram farmers actually useful, NOT rely on the mysterious and mythical concept of pure charity and altruism in an entrenched, brutal and stark pvp game setting. The donation system for iHubs is ass-backwards and counter-intuitive; having a system where each partisan's effort in capturing or defending a system IS the driving force of the gameplay makes FAR more sense than assuming people in...let's hear it...a game about CAPITALISM...will tend to give into altruistic tendencies of socialism in the middle of a gorram war is not only bewildering, but such an off-base read of human behavior as to be ironic, which I'm assuming was not the intention.

This would, oddly enough 'spread the burden' a bit more than the current system, which relies on small power blocs in the game who actually care about the war effort to donate LP to increase the tier level. The current caldari/gallente iteration of the long-standing quagmire that is the war is (and has been for some time) focused on income denial by keeping each side's tier level down. The matari/amarr side is basically lopsided to the minmatar at tier 3 or 4, and the amarr pretty much completely turning that on its head and flipping the field completely in their favor for a few weeks, at which point they lose interest and slip back into hisec, having things return to where they were before.

Having each side's income be dependent on the number of systems controlled encourages and organic attack pattern for those not affiliated with larger corporations or alliances; they see systems that are being more heavily contested, and they pile on until the system flips. I would recommend replacing the infrastructure hub mechanic with the same mechanics as nullsec in regards to Territorial Claim units and Sovereignty Blockade units, as this is currently a tried and true game mechanic, and would be consistent with the current in-game mechanics.

Admittedly, this would be part of my larger idea to expand FW for non-empire factions, including pirates and factions like the Khanid and Ammatar, to both all parts of low and some larger swaths of null. It would be an interesting experiment, but before that, I would like them to fix the bewildering system of iHub dumping for wz control. All ideas are welcome, since they can't be any more outlandish or odd than the current system...
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2014-01-25 13:57:34 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Please fix the Warzone Control Percentage for factional warfare to be reflected by simply the number of systems owned in the warzone. It would be in line with the current intention of system capturing, make the gorram farmers actually useful, NOT rely on the mysterious and mythical concept of pure charity and altruism in an entrenched, brutal and stark pvp game setting. The donation system for iHubs is ass-backwards and counter-intuitive; having a system where each partisan's effort in capturing or defending a system IS the driving force of the gameplay makes FAR more sense than assuming people in...let's hear it...a game about CAPITALISM...will tend to give into altruistic tendencies of socialism in the middle of a gorram war is not only bewildering, but such an off-base read of human behavior as to be ironic, which I'm assuming was not the intention.

This would, oddly enough 'spread the burden' a bit more than the current system, which relies on small power blocs in the game who actually care about the war effort to donate LP to increase the tier level. The current caldari/gallente iteration of the long-standing quagmire that is the war is (and has been for some time) focused on income denial by keeping each side's tier level down. The matari/amarr side is basically lopsided to the minmatar at tier 3 or 4, and the amarr pretty much completely turning that on its head and flipping the field completely in their favor for a few weeks, at which point they lose interest and slip back into hisec, having things return to where they were before.

Having each side's income be dependent on the number of systems controlled encourages and organic attack pattern for those not affiliated with larger corporations or alliances; they see systems that are being more heavily contested, and they pile on until the system flips. I would recommend replacing the infrastructure hub mechanic with the same mechanics as nullsec in regards to Territorial Claim units and Sovereignty Blockade units, as this is currently a tried and true game mechanic, and would be consistent with the current in-game mechanics.

Admittedly, this would be part of my larger idea to expand FW for non-empire factions, including pirates and factions like the Khanid and Ammatar, to both all parts of low and some larger swaths of null. It would be an interesting experiment, but before that, I would like them to fix the bewildering system of iHub dumping for wz control. All ideas are welcome, since they can't be any more outlandish or odd than the current system...

Agreed on the donations.

No one ever really does it cause it cuts into the Iso/hour. I used to do it until I realized how many plexus you have to run to not only support yourself, but also make any kind of difference for the system.