These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Low Sec FW Meetings

First post First post
Author
Irya Boone
The Scope
#121 - 2014-08-26 10:14:46 UTC
But if the reward stay the same even in higher tier , if a legit pilot choose to defend He gonna loose of money because at higher tier your Lp worth less and less day after day.

CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails .... Open that damn door !!

you shall all bow and pray BoB

dark Jim
Space-Brewery-Association
#122 - 2014-08-26 11:00:07 UTC  |  Edited by: dark Jim
sorry for my bad english

I.M.H.O. FW mechnaics were broken! (since ~2011)

actual chance to fix it:
around ten amarr players (with ~50+ alts) stop all deplexing activities.
near all amarr systems will fall within days,
thereby ccp reacting with emergency patch within weeks (enogh tears Lol ).

my simple long-term considerations how a attractive war zone can be ensured (shoud be the prior. one goal of FW)

1. 180° turnaround of LP payout mechanic!

higher FW zone controle means lower LP payout for plexing!
sounds broken - but it makes sense ;)

the FW players (corps & allis) will have fights for their own strategically important systems.
important may be FW mission agents, entrance of systemclusters, local faction drops (like huola) or even some kind of rollplay > thers still possibility of total warzone control (good for the ego of a faction).
deplesxing had to be done by opponents who where are interested in system and not by farming chars (who gives near zero fights and switch the faction all the time. a lot were active in near extintct time zones (EVE it self, even FW had larger active player base in the past, time to react ccp!)).
   

2. no tier level for FW missions (works in the past and woud still working)

a result woud be calculable possibility to made some LPs (ISK) not risk free through needed traveling.
with some overhauling of missions (eg. its shoud be impossible for all factions! to run level 4 with cheap, low risk steahlbombers) this woud
provides some intressting targets (ISK wise!) for local opponent FW player or local pirats!


one thing for sure, some small fixes dosent fix broken FW!
theres no need to promote 23/7 psychopath plexing-deplexing "war zone" (the mechanics since years!)
the mechanics shoud be for average player (or at least good health compatible) to provides GF (solo, small and mid-scale pew pew fight for fun)
Samwise Everquest
Plus 10 NV
#123 - 2014-08-26 13:04:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Samwise Everquest
Subsparx wrote:
You realize Defensive Plexing already has a HUGE penalty right? If you run an offensive plex in Caldari worth 10k right now, you get a 5k payout. Gallente are T4 and if their system is 20% contested they would get 3500 to deplex it.


the point is there is no risk and you can git a 300k naked frigate to do the job, add warp stabs for extra shiny. you shouldn't be paid more at a higher tier to defend a system you've already taken. It should be expected to defend a system you've conquered unless you just conquered it for LP then I guess...

btw def is defensive plexing easy and good money. i remember making like 10k on larges while in t1 or t2 not doing a single thing and without any risk. thats more LP than incursions per hour which take a hell of a lot more strategy and such.

i wish FW was controlled by small gangs and fleets rather than plexing alts. aint no body got time for that ****. I mean XG said his ALT did 100 plexes or some **** in a month. man i cant even do that on my main not sure how the **** he had time to do that on an alt. in everquest we call that poopsocking and it ******* sucks for most of us who don't live in New Eden 24/7.

Pras Phil.

Rahelis
Doomheim
#124 - 2014-08-26 13:17:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Rahelis
Plexing itself is poor game game design.


FW should only give LPs for enemy ship and pod kills.


Missions should give VP. So missions would be the plexes of today.


The game has to be made that way that actual playing is the goal - not alts orbiting buttons.


FW space is a mix of low sec and null sex.


Titan brigdes have to be made not possible. Titan boosts should work.


There has to be a jump Inhibitor - system wide. Why make a space for newbees when PL can titan drop you with caps? JF get more range due to less fuel consumption (Hyperion) and can bypass the warzones.


I would allow bombs and made all secutriy status stiff not working - lke in null and wh space.


The faction police should attack war targets.


It would be great fun to make bubbles work - say in a system your faction holds.


All militas fight all militas.


Make FW space hellish and violent.
Samwise Everquest
Plus 10 NV
#125 - 2014-08-26 13:31:24 UTC
missions should be on par with l5s as far as difficulty. no faction should be able to solo them in a bomber. FW missions should require a team/fleet or at least a few friends.

Pras Phil.

Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#126 - 2014-08-26 13:34:57 UTC
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#127 - 2014-08-26 13:45:58 UTC
I will just say that there are alltot of posts about balance issues and lp. CCP has been messing with lp up and down and changing tiers but it doesn't effect the real problem. FW occupancy still ends up a game for rabbit plexing alts this is root of the problem and until it is dealt with fw occupancy will fail to be fun.


Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
Subsparx wrote:
You realize Defensive Plexing already has a HUGE penalty right? If you run an offensive plex in Caldari worth 10k right now, you get a 5k payout. Gallente are T4 and if their system is 20% contested they would get 3500 to deplex it.


It's still too high for a 1hr old alt that can complete the plex in a 20k ISK ship (Navitas) with a free clone.

I'd support a decrease on rewards for d-plexing when at high tiers like that. Say d-plexing stays at T2 rewards no matter how high you go?


Also, I really really REALLY love how people assume deplexing and oplexing alts didn't exist before the recent expansion. Were they just so ingrained before that people didn't realize how much back and forth plexing we had to do just to keep systems stable?


The problem is not how much lp defensive players get. The problem is that rabbit plexing works at all. CCP needs to take steps to eradicate rabbit plexing. Offensive and defensive rabbit plexing needs to go. The goal should be that each plex captured involves at least 1.5 pvp fights.

You are absolutely correct that this is not just a problem since the last expansion. It has been a problem since the start of faction war. And for the first few years of faction war we got no lp for plexing at all. The problem was the game was boring because you could capture a hundred plexes without a fight.

How can ccp make it so each plex captured involves 1.5 fights on average?

1) Timer rollbacks
2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it.

Those 2 steps would eliminate rabbit plexing and make occupancy a pvp game. CCP has said they would take these steps but never have. Once that is done, then and only then, start thinking about how the rewards should be tweaked. Because if you are losing a ship every other plex you take you may actually need that lp! If that happens then fw missions will also need their lp cut.

But trying to balance the rewards for plexing before the actual plex mechanics are worked out is not smart. It has been the focus error ccp has made throughout. They never focused on ending rabbit plexing and they simply hoped throwing isk at it would make everyone happy. As for me, I plexed when we had lp and when we didn't and it doesn't matter. If occupancy remains a game of rabbit plexing it sucks.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#128 - 2014-08-26 13:59:21 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I will just say that there are alltot of posts about balance issues and lp. CCP has been messing with lp up and down and changing tiers but it doesn't effect the real problem. FW occupancy still ends up a game for rabbit plexing alts this is root of the problem and until it is dealt with fw occupancy will fail to be fun.


Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
Subsparx wrote:
You realize Defensive Plexing already has a HUGE penalty right? If you run an offensive plex in Caldari worth 10k right now, you get a 5k payout. Gallente are T4 and if their system is 20% contested they would get 3500 to deplex it.


It's still too high for a 1hr old alt that can complete the plex in a 20k ISK ship (Navitas) with a free clone.

I'd support a decrease on rewards for d-plexing when at high tiers like that. Say d-plexing stays at T2 rewards no matter how high you go?


Also, I really really REALLY love how people assume deplexing and oplexing alts didn't exist before the recent expansion. Were they just so ingrained before that people didn't realize how much back and forth plexing we had to do just to keep systems stable?


The problem is not how much lp defensive players get. The problem is that rabbit plexing works at all. CCP needs to take steps to eradicate rabbit plexing. Offensive and defensive rabbit plexing needs to go. The goal should be that each plex captured involves at least 1.5 pvp fights.

You are absolutely correct that this is not just a problem since the last expansion. It has been a problem since the start of faction war. And for the first few years of faction war we got no lp for plexing at all. The problem was the game was boring because you could capture a hundred plexes without a fight.

How can ccp make it so each plex captured involves 1.5 fights on average?

1) Timer rollbacks
2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it.

Those 2 steps would eliminate rabbit plexing and make occupancy a pvp game. CCP has said they would take these steps but never have. Once that is done, then and only then, start thinking about how the rewards should be tweaked. Because if you are losing a ship every other plex you take you may actually need that lp! If that happens then fw missions will also need their lp cut.

But trying to balance the rewards for plexing before the actual plex mechanics are worked out is not smart. It has been the focus error ccp has made throughout. They never focused on ending rabbit plexing and they simply hoped throwing isk at it would make everyone happy. As for me, I plexed when we had lp and when we didn't and it doesn't matter. If occupancy remains a game of rabbit plexing it sucks.



1) No argument, though the need for them is far less with the drastic oplexing nerf.

2) Already implemented, its called the FW window.

Thanks
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#129 - 2014-08-26 15:18:40 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I will just say that there are alltot of posts about balance issues and lp. CCP has been messing with lp up and down and changing tiers but it doesn't effect the real problem. FW occupancy still ends up a game for rabbit plexing alts this is root of the problem and until it is dealt with fw occupancy will fail to be fun.


Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
Subsparx wrote:
You realize Defensive Plexing already has a HUGE penalty right? If you run an offensive plex in Caldari worth 10k right now, you get a 5k payout. Gallente are T4 and if their system is 20% contested they would get 3500 to deplex it.


It's still too high for a 1hr old alt that can complete the plex in a 20k ISK ship (Navitas) with a free clone.

I'd support a decrease on rewards for d-plexing when at high tiers like that. Say d-plexing stays at T2 rewards no matter how high you go?


Also, I really really REALLY love how people assume deplexing and oplexing alts didn't exist before the recent expansion. Were they just so ingrained before that people didn't realize how much back and forth plexing we had to do just to keep systems stable?


The problem is not how much lp defensive players get. The problem is that rabbit plexing works at all. CCP needs to take steps to eradicate rabbit plexing. Offensive and defensive rabbit plexing needs to go. The goal should be that each plex captured involves at least 1.5 pvp fights.

You are absolutely correct that this is not just a problem since the last expansion. It has been a problem since the start of faction war. And for the first few years of faction war we got no lp for plexing at all. The problem was the game was boring because you could capture a hundred plexes without a fight.

How can ccp make it so each plex captured involves 1.5 fights on average?

1) Timer rollbacks
2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it.

Those 2 steps would eliminate rabbit plexing and make occupancy a pvp game. CCP has said they would take these steps but never have. Once that is done, then and only then, start thinking about how the rewards should be tweaked. Because if you are losing a ship every other plex you take you may actually need that lp! If that happens then fw missions will also need their lp cut.

But trying to balance the rewards for plexing before the actual plex mechanics are worked out is not smart. It has been the focus error ccp has made throughout. They never focused on ending rabbit plexing and they simply hoped throwing isk at it would make everyone happy. As for me, I plexed when we had lp and when we didn't and it doesn't matter. If occupancy remains a game of rabbit plexing it sucks.



1) No argument, though the need for them is far less with the drastic oplexing nerf.

2) Already implemented, its called the FW window.

Thanks



I'm glad to see you are no longer trying to argue against timer rollbacks, but I see you are still in favor of the game being won by rabbit d-plexxers. Your favorable view toward rabbit d-plexing makes your constant arguments against these two measures understandable.

We do not have "2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it."

We only get intel on a militia wide scale after the plex is finished. Obviously this is not sufficient to quickly move and defend the plex. Players should have real time information on where their military complexes are being attacked. Not having this information is silly from an immersions point of view but it is also why rabbit plexing is so efficient.

Of course you know that but you want rabbit plexing to remain in the game so you are trying to obfuscate the issue.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#130 - 2014-08-26 15:52:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Cearain wrote:
I'm glad to see you are no longer trying to argue against timer rollbacks, but I see you are still in favor of the game being won by rabbit d-plexxers. Your favorable view toward rabbit d-plexing makes your constant arguments against these two measures understandable.


Ive been advocating timer rollbacks for longer than you have. Unlike you, i know what problem they were intended to fix. That problem has been resolved in an alternative way.

As i have said before, d-plex alts ensure all occupancy is a pvp effort. Depending on which system is being attacked dictates how blobby the response is. For example, mantenault hs changed hands quite frequently in recent months under the constant pressure of a small gang of russian squids (who do fight, before you make another uninformed assumption) living out of a pos. These same russians would have no effect if they tried the same thing in say, nenna.

As for intel, i can precisely tell you where plexes azre being run, and im not even logged in. Hysera, Mantenalt, Serenemi and Hasama.

Ill now let you get back to posting complete nonsense, thanks.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#131 - 2014-08-26 16:10:16 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I'm glad to see you are no longer trying to argue against timer rollbacks, but I see you are still in favor of the game being won by rabbit d-plexxers. Your favorable view toward rabbit d-plexing makes your constant arguments against these two measures understandable.


Ive been advocating timer rollbacks for longer than you have. Unlike you, i know what problem they were intended to fix. That problem has been resolved in an alternative way.

As i have said before, d-plex alts ensure all occupancy is a pvp effort. Depending on which system is being attacked dictates how blobby the response is. For example, mantenault hs changed hands quite frequently in recent months under the constant pressure of a small gang of russian squids (who do fight, before you make another uninformed assumption) living out of a pos. These same russians would have no effect if they tried the same thing in say, nenna.

Ill now let you get back to posting complete nonsense, thanks.



d-plex alts are occupancy efforts. They change the contested level in a system. They are not pvp.

You think my views are nonesense because you explicitly like alt rabbit d-plexing. The 2 proposals I support would eliminate them.

It's really just up to ccp whether they want occupancy to be held through deplexing rabbit alts, or pvp.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
#132 - 2014-08-26 16:18:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Crosi Wesdo
Cearain wrote:
d-plex alts are occupancy efforts. They change the contested level in a system. They are not pvp.

You think my views are nonesense because you explicitly like alt rabbit d-plexing. The 2 proposals I support would eliminate them.

It's really just up to ccp whether they want occupancy to be held through deplexing rabbit alts, or pvp.


Timer rollbacks will not kill d-plexing alts. Intel on where alts are dplexing will not kill alts.

Only these mythical pilots who are interested in chasing non combat alts in systems they dont care about, kill dplexing alts. Something that they can do right now.

The way to nullify dplexing alts in a system or area, is for pilots to actively start caring about that system or area and focus pilots there. Once that happens dplexing alts are useless and a pvp response is triggered. Size of the response would normally be dependant on the location of the system and its strategic value. The winner would likely be the side who cares about it more, al things being equal.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#133 - 2014-08-26 16:31:59 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
d-plex alts are occupancy efforts. They change the contested level in a system. They are not pvp.

You think my views are nonesense because you explicitly like alt rabbit d-plexing. The 2 proposals I support would eliminate them.

It's really just up to ccp whether they want occupancy to be held through deplexing rabbit alts, or pvp.


Timer rollbacks will not kill d-plexing alts. Intel on where alts are dplexing will not kill alts.

Only these mythical pilots who are interested in chasing non combat alts in systems they dont care about, kill dplexing alts. Something that they can do right now.

The way to nullify dplexing alts in a system or area, is for pilots to actively start caring about that system or area and focus pilots there. Once that happens dplexing alts are useless and a pvp response is triggered. Size of the response would normally be dependant on the location of the system and its strategic value. The winner would likely be the side who cares about it more, al things being equal.


neutrals cannot have any effect on this though
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#134 - 2014-08-26 16:34:35 UTC
Crosi Wesdo wrote:
Cearain wrote:
d-plex alts are occupancy efforts. They change the contested level in a system. They are not pvp.

You think my views are nonesense because you explicitly like alt rabbit d-plexing. The 2 proposals I support would eliminate them.

It's really just up to ccp whether they want occupancy to be held through deplexing rabbit alts, or pvp.


Timer rollbacks will not kill d-plexing alts. Intel on where alts are dplexing will not kill alts.



Those 2 measure will kill them off.

But even if I can't convince you of that you should at least agree that both measures will make them less effective relative to the pvper who plexes. Everytime the rabbit alt warps out his time will be lost. He can go a system or 2 over to plex but that will do him no good because the enemy will know right where he is.


Crosi Wesdo wrote:

Only these mythical pilots who are interested in chasing non combat alts in systems they dont care about, kill dplexing alts. Something that they can do right now..


No its the opposite. People who are not interested in chasing noncombat alts want this change. That way the warzone will have no, or at least fewer, non combat plexing alts. You are the one who is defending thealts rabbit plexing. That explains why you are against measures that would make it harder to do rabbit plexing.


Crosi Wesdo wrote:


The way to nullify dplexing alts in a system or area, is for pilots to actively start caring about that system or area and focus pilots there. Once that happens dplexing alts are useless and a pvp response is triggered. Size of the response would normally be dependant on the location of the system and its strategic value. The winner would likely be the side who cares about it more, al things being equal.


Yeah sorry not very many pvpers are interested in chasing rabbit alts when there are no timer rollbacks and the rabbits can just go a few jumps and start plexing without any war targets even knowing.


You might like to do that but most people see this gameplay as not worth their time.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Moglarr
Operation Meatshield
#135 - 2014-08-26 21:18:27 UTC
Cearain wrote:
I will just say that there are alltot of posts about balance issues and lp. CCP has been messing with lp up and down and changing tiers but it doesn't effect the real problem. FW occupancy still ends up a game for rabbit plexing alts this is root of the problem and until it is dealt with fw occupancy will fail to be fun.


Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:
Subsparx wrote:
You realize Defensive Plexing already has a HUGE penalty right? If you run an offensive plex in Caldari worth 10k right now, you get a 5k payout. Gallente are T4 and if their system is 20% contested they would get 3500 to deplex it.


It's still too high for a 1hr old alt that can complete the plex in a 20k ISK ship (Navitas) with a free clone.

I'd support a decrease on rewards for d-plexing when at high tiers like that. Say d-plexing stays at T2 rewards no matter how high you go?


Also, I really really REALLY love how people assume deplexing and oplexing alts didn't exist before the recent expansion. Were they just so ingrained before that people didn't realize how much back and forth plexing we had to do just to keep systems stable?


The problem is not how much lp defensive players get. The problem is that rabbit plexing works at all. CCP needs to take steps to eradicate rabbit plexing. Offensive and defensive rabbit plexing needs to go. The goal should be that each plex captured involves at least 1.5 pvp fights.

You are absolutely correct that this is not just a problem since the last expansion. It has been a problem since the start of faction war. And for the first few years of faction war we got no lp for plexing at all. The problem was the game was boring because you could capture a hundred plexes without a fight.

How can ccp make it so each plex captured involves 1.5 fights on average?

1) Timer rollbacks
2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it.

Those 2 steps would eliminate rabbit plexing and make occupancy a pvp game. CCP has said they would take these steps but never have. Once that is done, then and only then, start thinking about how the rewards should be tweaked. Because if you are losing a ship every other plex you take you may actually need that lp! If that happens then fw missions will also need their lp cut.

But trying to balance the rewards for plexing before the actual plex mechanics are worked out is not smart. It has been the focus error ccp has made throughout. They never focused on ending rabbit plexing and they simply hoped throwing isk at it would make everyone happy. As for me, I plexed when we had lp and when we didn't and it doesn't matter. If occupancy remains a game of rabbit plexing it sucks.



Dude, what?

I don't think someone can build a game mechanics that would force 1.5 PVP fights. Partially because half a fight would be hard to do, and you can't force a fight anyway. If someone sees you coming and doesn't want to fight you they wont. Deal with it. A timer rollback, or at least and instant timer rollback would be a terrible idea because it would allow non-FW pilots to impact the contested level of a system significantly, and would make plexing in general suck even more than it does now. If there was a scaling delay before a roll back started that might be better. But ultimately if you want to roll back the timer in a plex there is a very easy way to do it - sit in that plex just like everyone else. Maybe the guy who ran from you is coming back with friends? Maybe he is baiting you into doing something dumb like rant on the forums. Maybe he is trying to make you leave the system out of frustration. These are all legitimate tactics, and they can all be countered and are technically PVP. If you can't be bothered to counter these tactics because they wont honourably 1v1 you then you shouldn't be campaigning this hard for something you don't care about.

All in all your arguments don't seem fleshed out, and like I've mentioned earlier seem to be based solely from the experience of trying to nab dudes farming in backwater systems by yourself. Obviously those dudes wont fight you, if you wanted a fight you'd go to where the enemy is actively working. You would join a fleet, or create a fleet. You don't need some magic omniscient "an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it" because your detailed intel should come from players. The FW window, dotlan and any other resource that shows you stats and system history can offer you all the intel you need to find where the enemy is operating.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#136 - 2014-08-26 23:45:11 UTC
how would it make plexing suck? is this because to you, plexing is running from everything and receiving LP for it?
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#137 - 2014-08-27 02:55:50 UTC
Moglarr wrote:
Cearain wrote:

The problem is not how much lp defensive players get. The problem is that rabbit plexing works at all. CCP needs to take steps to eradicate rabbit plexing. Offensive and defensive rabbit plexing needs to go. The goal should be that each plex captured involves at least 1.5 pvp fights.

You are absolutely correct that this is not just a problem since the last expansion. It has been a problem since the start of faction war. And for the first few years of faction war we got no lp for plexing at all. The problem was the game was boring because you could capture a hundred plexes without a fight.

How can ccp make it so each plex captured involves 1.5 fights on average?

1) Timer rollbacks
2) an intel system where everyone in militia know where and when plex timers are being run. That way they can quickly and easily get there and defend it.

Those 2 steps would eliminate rabbit plexing and make occupancy a pvp game. CCP has said they would take these steps but never have. Once that is done, then and only then, start thinking about how the rewards should be tweaked. Because if you are losing a ship every other plex you take you may actually need that lp! If that happens then fw missions will also need their lp cut.

But trying to balance the rewards for plexing before the actual plex mechanics are worked out is not smart. It has been the focus error ccp has made throughout. They never focused on ending rabbit plexing and they simply hoped throwing isk at it would make everyone happy. As for me, I plexed when we had lp and when we didn't and it doesn't matter. If occupancy remains a game of rabbit plexing it sucks.



Dude, what?

I don't think someone can build a game mechanics that would force 1.5 PVP fights. Partially because half a fight would be hard to do, and you can't force a fight anyway.



Dude,
Do you know what it means to average something?


Moglarr wrote:


If someone sees you coming and doesn't want to fight you they wont. Deal with it.


I don't mind people running from fights. The problem is that people that constantly run from every fight have just as much impact on the warzone as people who are willing and able to fight. That is the problem and why the occupancy war is too boring for most people to stomach.

Moglarr wrote:


A timer rollback, or at least and instant timer rollback would be a terrible idea because it would allow non-FW pilots to impact the contested level of a system significantly, and would make plexing in general suck even more than it does now. .


If you think it would suck to have more pvp in plexes then yes it would suck. More pirates would know fw pilots have an incentive to stay and fight as opposed to just running. That would mean more pirates would enter plexes for pvp and we would get more pvp in plexes.

IMO plexing sucks now because there is not enough pvp in plexes. Having more pvp involved with each plex would make each plex more valuable to take and make plexing much more fun. If ccp also slashed the lp gain from missions it would also make the lp much more valuable.

Moglarr wrote:


If there was a scaling delay before a roll back started that might be better. But ultimately if you want to roll back the timer in a plex there is a very easy way to do it - sit in that plex just like everyone else. Maybe the guy who ran from you is coming back with friends? [lol yeah but there is also that chance that they are just alts rabbit plexing and what do you think happens 99% of the time?]

All in all your arguments don't seem fleshed out, and like I've mentioned earlier seem to be based solely from the experience of trying to nab dudes farming in backwater systems by yourself.....


The arguments have been fleshed out over years. You just want to farm plexes without ever actually fighting for them. Sorry CCP wants this to be a pvp mechanic. You can still run missions if you want pve.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Moglarr
Operation Meatshield
#138 - 2014-08-27 14:47:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Moglarr
Cearain wrote:
Stuff.


If you want someone to attack you while you're in a plex, then go plex a home system. If you want pirates to attack you while you're in a plex go plex Kinakka. If your whole goal of this timer rollback campaign is to penalize FW pilots who don't want to have to fight neutrals for control of plexes then I'd have to say your motivation is in the wrong place. When a neutral pilot is in a plex the timer does not count down because that pilot is not aligned with either milita and as such has no impact on warzone control. This makes sense, considering that this pilot has chosen not to participate in FW. If the timer starts to roll back right away this neutral pilot is now actively impacting the warzone in favour of stability, this doesn't make sense considering that this pilot has chosen not to participate in FW and thus have no impact on the region.

Now, if you consider the suggested idea of a delay on a time rollback you have a happy middle-ground (however, I still feel that all timer roll backs should be done by FW pilots and not FW mechanics).

First, let me clarify something; if someone is running a plex in a system you don't want them to run a plex in and they run away from you, jump out two systems to sit in a plex there - mission accomplished. You have successfully defended your target system, now defend the plex from any enemies who may come and take it. If you also want to defend the second system your foe has fled to, you now must decide, "Do I hold here to protect this system, chase after my prey, or get my corporation/alliance involved in defending our space?" Intel, timer rollbacks and combat are all triggered by pilots. Pilots can tell you what they see in systems you're not in, pilots will roll timers back and eventually close plexes, and pilots will attack you or defend against you taking those plexes.

Now back to the rollback compromise. If you chase someone out of a plex and he runs two systems over to run another plex the prey plexer must then sit in the new plex for X minutes. He has to consider, however, that after Y minutes the timer in the first plex he was in is going to start to tick up (because for some reason he assumes/knows the guy who chased him off wont capture plexes because ~reasons~) which means he needs to decide is it worth it to run this timer and hope no one comes for him, or should he try and get back into the first plex he was in? See win-win. Your presence frustrates your foe's ability to contest your system, and you apparently only have to occasionally undock to shoo away the plexers in your system. Because we couldn't have you spin the button for the 10-20 minutes it would take to close the plex.

So, I'm still left a little confused. Why do we need timer rollbacks again?
Master Sergeant MacRobert
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#139 - 2014-08-27 16:25:48 UTC
On page 4

Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:


For example

1. militia pilot arrives in system, having noticed the contested rate was rising
2. finds the aforementioned evasion plexer running a plex and already minutes in to capturing
3. Pursues target out of the plex
4. Target opens another plex of equal or smaller size in either the same system or neighbouring system
5. Militia pilot can chase target out of the newly opened 2nd plex or can run down and capture the original
6. In both options the target "evasion alt" can capture either the new plex or the original plex by moving back and forth between them.
7. Only option to the hunter is to give up on defending war zone sov by combat and instead join in the non interactive farming of victory points in the opposite direction or call in further pilots to sit in all the plex's available
8. Evasion plexer's will continue with non interactive play as they know that eventually they will be given time to plex without a pursuer or will find the opposing players give up due to boredom from unsatisfying non interaction play, instead moving on hoping to find another target that will consider interaction.


Timer rollbacks at an accelerated rate (when moving towards the "neutral" uncontested plex state) prevent the scenario described above and would further decentivise this bad game style at the benefit of more interactive play. The FWzones need this.

It is one of the reasons why there are more fights between active Militia vs neutrals / pirates than there is between Militia vs Militia

Personally I would have to implement the reduction of the bonus's to LP rewards given by faction Tier levels at the same time. They are currently ridiculous...


Timer rollback should be have a graded system (see below).

I am not sure I agree with the neutrals should not effect a timer rollback. They could quite easily be mercenaries working for a faction and they too deserve something for forcing you out of the plex you chose not to defend. If you don't go back (With or without friends) until they leave you should lose some of the work you put in.

I would propose the following:

You exit the plex leaving it empty. Timer remains stationary
A neutral drives you out of the plex. The timer deplex's to neutral at the same standard rate ( x1 ).
An opposing militia drives you out and stays in the pkex. The timer rolls back at double rate to neutral (x2) and the captures at normal rate (beyond "neutral")

This does not remove farmers, rabbit or otherwise but it addresses the imbalance that currently exists. It I'd no longer easy to plex a system without fighting for it, if there is an active defender of equal or greater class.

Some of the smokescreens being posted in this thread are laughable and if you are going to post perhaps read what has gone before? Mmmm?

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#140 - 2014-08-27 16:30:21 UTC
Things should be changed because reasons.