These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Fanfest 2014] Factional Warfare, round table.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Samuel Reaper
Conspiracy Theory.
#101 - 2014-05-05 18:44:53 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
King Fu Hostile wrote:
And what's wrong with that? Why would the defender need to sit 19 minutes in a novice for no LP after the "attacker" has been driven off? What purpose does this serve, is it compelling and exciting gameplay?
It serves as a punishment for winning the engagement! How dare you run them out??!!


I too think that one 50mil SP character in a Comet should be able to defend a dozen plexes at a time against low-skilled characters in basic frigates. It is the height of absurdity to ask a pilot with lots of skillpoints to actually sit in a plex and run the timer down if he wants to hold it. He should be able to stop people soloing as many plexes as he can reach without ever having to do the boring scrub work the attackers will have to do to make any progress.

I agree that the current system isn't ideal but the rollback fix is worse. Optimal option is to have two timers and whoever counts down there own one first wins the plex.
Two low-skilled players in hookbills > 1 high skilled player in Comet - if the two low skilled players are competent.




If they are competent and if they are working together. However, while those two pilots will possibly be able to take one plex while working together the solo guy in the Comet can still protect as many plexes as are within his range from any low skill soloers without ever having to run a timer down. The two guys in hookbills have to sit in the same place but the defender can be all over the map. Defenders will get a HUGE force multiplier through a rollback change.

What's the objection to dual timers, out of interest? As far as I can see they solve the same problems but without setting up a new more significant imbalance.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#102 - 2014-05-05 18:56:14 UTC
The only thing that will ever reduce farmer activity is either:

A) Make plexes harder to do.

OR

B) Make plexes less profitable.

OR

C) Some combination thereof.

Having discussions about cloaks and warp core stabs makes evasion more difficult and that is all. The plexes by themselves are still stupidly easy to do and still pay ridiculous amounts of LP that can be converted into isk. Farmers will warp off rather then cloaking. There should be some farming as it greases the wheels of FW. Too much and you bath a militia in an acid bath that drives off members in frustration. That's where we are currently.

A DPS check would reduce some farming as it makes plexes harder. I approve. A cloaking ban kills warp in traps as well as makes more difficult the cloaky logi/ ecm alt. That reduces risk and play options and I don't like it.

Lastly, there's my favorite suggestion - kill the tier system and pay everyone at current tier 2 prices. Farmers would still exist but they'd respond to scarcity in the market rather then riding LP donation wave.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#103 - 2014-05-05 19:17:49 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Samuel Reaper wrote:
If they are competent and if they are working together. However, while those two pilots will possibly be able to take one plex while working together the solo guy in the Comet can still protect as many plexes as are within his range from any low skill soloers without ever having to run a timer down. The two guys in hookbills have to sit in the same place but the defender can be all over the map. Defenders will get a HUGE force multiplier through a rollback change.

What's the objection to dual timers, out of interest? As far as I can see they solve the same problems but without setting up a new more significant imbalance.
In your scenario the Comet can only protect the plexes that the hookbills choose not to enter. We're back at the status quo. Yes, the defender gets a huge force multiplier through a rollback change. The multiplier is this:

- if he's willing to defend a system, then the other side has to bring more than him to start taking plexes. He's still not going to want to defend backwater systems (ok, somebody might, but not anybody I know), but he will be able to run off afk plexing alts in systems he cares about (home systems).

Dual timers - No different than the current system except the total engagement time is shorter. The defender is still punished (by having to run the timer) for winning the engagement (making the other guy run).
Samuel Reaper
Conspiracy Theory.
#104 - 2014-05-05 19:26:34 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Samuel Reaper wrote:
If they are competent and if they are working together. However, while those two pilots will possibly be able to take one plex while working together the solo guy in the Comet can still protect as many plexes as are within his range from any low skill soloers without ever having to run a timer down. The two guys in hookbills have to sit in the same place but the defender can be all over the map. Defenders will get a HUGE force multiplier through a rollback change.

What's the objection to dual timers, out of interest? As far as I can see they solve the same problems but without setting up a new more significant imbalance.
In your scenario the Comet can only protect the plexes that the hookbills choose not to enter. We're back at the status quo. Yes, the defender gets a huge force multiplier through a rollback change. This multiplier is this:

- if he's willing to defend a system, then the other side has to bring more than him to start taking plexes. He's still not going to want to defend backwater systems (ok, somebody might, but not anybody I know), but he will be able to run off afk plexing alts in systems he cares about (home systems).

Dual timers - No different than the current system except the total engagement is shorter. The defender is still punished (by running the timer) for winning the engagement (making the other guy run).




Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2014-05-05 19:29:32 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
the solo guy in the Comet can still protect as many plexes as are within his range from any low skill soloers without ever having to run a timer down.

Mr. Comet can negate plexes to anyone that isn't willing or able to pop him, yes.

What's wrong with that?

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#106 - 2014-05-05 19:30:58 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:
Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?
Timer rollbacks would apply equally to the attacker. Run the defender out and the timer starts heading back towards zero.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#107 - 2014-05-05 19:37:10 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
The only thing that will ever reduce farmer activity is either:

A) Make plexes harder to do.

OR

B) Make plexes less profitable.

OR

C) Some combination thereof.

Having discussions about cloaks and warp core stabs makes evasion more difficult and that is all. The plexes by themselves are still stupidly easy to do and still pay ridiculous amounts of LP that can be converted into isk. Farmers will warp off rather then cloaking. There should be some farming as it greases the wheels of FW. Too much and you bath a militia in an acid bath that drives off members in frustration. That's where we are currently.

A DPS check would reduce some farming as it makes plexes harder. I approve. A cloaking ban kills warp in traps as well as makes more difficult the cloaky logi/ ecm alt. That reduces risk and play options and I don't like it.

Lastly, there's my favorite suggestion - kill the tier system and pay everyone at current tier 2 prices. Farmers would still exist but they'd respond to scarcity in the market rather then riding LP donation wave.


I don't think the goal should be to reduce farming. The goal is to increase the amount of pvp in plexes. These 2 goals are close and very close and related but there is a difference.

You can reduce by making npcs extremely tough but this will also reduce the pvp in plexes.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#108 - 2014-05-05 19:45:02 UTC
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.

JUSTK is recruiting
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#109 - 2014-05-05 20:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#110 - 2014-05-05 20:27:36 UTC
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I don't think there is any question that the ninja patch completely lopsided the Caldari Gallente fw I think Gallente got their medal shortly after that. I don't think it was due to any favoritism though. I think it just had to do with ignorance of the situation, and the fact that the current tier system was way too profitable.








Total warzone control was way after that so didnt affect the balance when we took the warzone for complete control was after cals had held alot of it for a while......

as for making it too profitable now ... i dont get this i could earn 5 times what i earn now bk then

No doubt damarrs tinfoil hattery will explode now funkybacon is on the csm


I thought Gallente captured all the systems like 80 days after the ninja patch. Are you saying Caldari had gained momentum and captured allot of the warzone between the ninja patch and gallente taking all systems? I know that they had several systems vulnerable at the time of the ninja patch but that is why the patch was so demoralizing.

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I agree the tier system then "was" way too profitable.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Julius Foederatus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2014-05-05 20:32:10 UTC
The problem with dual timers is that all it does is make it slightly less soul-crushing to counter plex. But it does nothing to make the current plex-by-evasion system less effective. The point is to stimulate conflict. Having to fight for your LP stimulates conflict, which is I thought what FW was about. Timer rollbacks force everyone to have more of a stake in a plex fight. Personally I'd like to see LP only given out for offensive plexing when a system flips, but CCP is too chickenshit to actually do that.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#112 - 2014-05-05 20:49:05 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:
The problem with dual timers is that all it does is make it slightly less soul-crushing to counter plex. But it does nothing to make the current plex-by-evasion system less effective. The point is to stimulate conflict. Having to fight for your LP stimulates conflict, which is I thought what FW was about. Timer rollbacks force everyone to have more of a stake in a plex fight. Personally I'd like to see LP only given out for offensive plexing when a system flips, but CCP is too chickenshit to actually do that.



I was thinking dual timers could also have roll backs. So if I warp in on an enemy in a small plex and they ran 5 minutes I would only need to wait 15 minutes to capture it myself not 20. If we both warp off then their counter will roll back to 15.

This might not be how it was envisioned but I think that there are plenty of options ccp could work with. The thing is they are about several years behind testing them out to see what form would work best.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#113 - 2014-05-05 20:53:54 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I was thinking dual timers could also have roll backs.
K.I.S.S - As one former PERV wisely stated - CCP has a hard enough time getting one timer right. Why force them into having two timers for each plex?
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2014-05-05 21:34:23 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?


2-3 fights per plex in every system? Not possible or realistic - simply due to the amount of players vs amount of systems in Eve.

2-3 fights per plex in a contested system on the front? It happens all of the time. I think you were gone at the time, but it was an absolute 23/7 bloodbath in Innia-Eha-Oicx area for an extended period of time. Frankly, I miss it.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#115 - 2014-05-05 21:57:30 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?

there is lucky enough to be even 1 fight for a plex these days. t1 logi has pretty much ruined FW plex pvp as you knew it. the new meta is having t1 logi alts cheap as hell and super effective with links. Ships do not die anymore in fights. these days its 'o reps arnt holding, bail'

having 2 or 3 brawl fights without logi isnt happening anymore in a plex which makes me sad.

The small plex is the only exception where the dps values on destroyers are so high your hull dies in 3 seconds. and destroyer fights are my favorite cuz logi is almost meaningless in them.

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Deerin
East Trading Co Ltd
#116 - 2014-05-05 22:02:08 UTC
Samuel Reaper wrote:

Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?


Why do you think it only applies to defender? It equally applies to attacker too.

...and comet example was just silly. If you know what your enemy has you can directly fit its counter and make up for SP difference....and this would create pew pew and content. In current system the farmer will just warp away/cloak and avoid conflict. No pew pew, no content.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#117 - 2014-05-05 22:37:57 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?


2-3 fights per plex in every system? Not possible or realistic - simply due to the amount of players vs amount of systems in Eve.

2-3 fights per plex in a contested system on the front? It happens all of the time. I think you were gone at the time, but it was an absolute 23/7 bloodbath in Innia-Eha-Oicx area for an extended period of time. Frankly, I miss it.


I think that should be the goal. I agree it won't happen with the current mechanics. There are plenty of people who would love it if eve offered better mechanics that yielded more quality small scale pvp. But it doesn't. Most of the changes ccp delivers are from a carebear perspective of "isk per hour" or "risk versus isk" gain.

I would hope I missed huge numbers of fights I was gone for 8 months and really don't see much point in going back. Eve pvp takes up too much time for too few good fights.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#118 - 2014-05-05 22:51:02 UTC
Cearain wrote:

I would hope I missed huge numbers of fights I was gone for 8 months and really don't see much point in going back. Eve pvp takes up too much time for too few good fights.


Listening to 95% of what you say, there was never really any point you being in FW.
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-05-06 00:58:19 UTC
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Cearain wrote:
stuff


There is plenty of PVP in plexes, the issue is the risk/reward and the out of balance impact that farmers have on WZ control.



"Plenty" of fights in plexes huh? What do you think is a good ratio of fights in a plex before its taken?

I think there should be about 2 or 3 fights in a plex before a plex is taken. How many fights on average do you think happen in each plex that is captured such that you claim there is "plenty of pvp in plexes"?

there is lucky enough to be even 1 fight for a plex these days. t1 logi has pretty much ruined FW plex pvp as you knew it. the new meta is having t1 logi alts cheap as hell and super effective with links. Ships do not die anymore in fights. these days its 'o reps arnt holding, bail'

having 2 or 3 brawl fights without logi isnt happening anymore in a plex which makes me sad.

The small plex is the only exception where the dps values on destroyers are so high your hull dies in 3 seconds. and destroyer fights are my favorite cuz logi is almost meaningless in them.



This guy clearly doesn't know what a JUSTK dragoon/Algos fleet with logi frig support is capable of. I employ you sir to come over to Eha and try it sometime Pirate

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Plato Forko
123 Fake Street
#120 - 2014-05-06 01:03:55 UTC
in amarr/min warzone that doctrine would soon be called the blue ball special Shocked