These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Team Pink Zombie Kittens Presents.....

First post
Author
Kaver Linkovir
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#81 - 2012-01-06 12:25:51 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The primary problem facing the Faction Warfare system is a lack of effective rewards for encouraging players to go out and fight, coupled with a lack of consequence and lack of meaning to the occupation of enemy faction's systems. Simply put, any fighting that goes on amongst the factions right now is completely arbitrary and grudge-driven, NOT mechanically driven. The "I'm fighting you just because" carrot went rotten years ago.


Quick update to this:

Being a really close window (from December to January) we kind of had to pick our battles. The idea was to do whatever we could fit in, as a runway for more comprehensive changes. Our January package will be alliances into faction warfare, and defect fixes such as the silly standings bug.

That should be a good start, leading up to what we're looking into next, which is "why would I bother to take space?". We're dealing with the comment in your quote, but it's not possible for the January patch.


Oh, wow, so it all just "We hereby inform you we are going to be kicking over your sandcastles and all you will get is a bugfix that you should have been given when it was first reported in the way way back." Because once you have implemented the Alliance allowed to join Faction Warfare thing we are going to be stuck with it for ever.

I have loved alliances and all their shananigans not being able to join Faction Warfare. It was the ONLY corner of EVE where alliances had no place. Where the Faction that was fought for determined everything. Bah.
Silence iKillYouu
Girls Lie But Zkill Doesn't
Pandemic Legion
#82 - 2012-01-06 12:30:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Silence iKillYouu
Not all alliance's will give a crap about FW
Only RP alliances who will be fun to kill lots.

Looking forward to any changes :)

Now we can make our own alliances and compete in alliance comps.
no Autoz aloud tho

EVE Mail me i dont check forums often.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#83 - 2012-01-06 13:07:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Hirana Yoshida
Ugh. Should have know the "Removing high-sec navy is a good idea for FW" guy was behind the "Lets make navy LP worthless and show FW the true meaning of blobs" idea Smile

Once more:
Could someone (or a Dev) post some alliance empire standings (4) so we can get an idea of just how monstrous a barrier 0.5 is?
My theory is that they will be largely positive due to day-to-day ratting/mission activities of all pilots. There are only two ways that I know of that allows one to tank ones factions and that is the faction specific storyline missions and being in FW, whereas doing just about anything involving shooting generic pirate NPCs increases faction standings.

PS: Have you separated FW areas from high-sec nodes yet .. the hub pipes in FW lowsec is going to need permanent reinforcement .. just sayin' Smile
Hikaru Kuroda
Extheria
#84 - 2012-01-06 13:46:02 UTC
If the new NeoCon is the first step to a completely new and improved interface, I applaud you. For the new players the current interface it's like the cockpit of a Boeing 747.

The interface need more graphical information and less text. The screen is always horribly clogged with windows.
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2012-01-06 13:53:45 UTC
Could you add new Neocom accessory button for the new compare tool. It is damn hard to access atm because there isn't even shortcut command available.

Thank you.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest

Har Harrison
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2012-01-06 15:03:23 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The primary problem facing the Faction Warfare system is a lack of effective rewards for encouraging players to go out and fight, coupled with a lack of consequence and lack of meaning to the occupation of enemy faction's systems. Simply put, any fighting that goes on amongst the factions right now is completely arbitrary and grudge-driven, NOT mechanically driven. The "I'm fighting you just because" carrot went rotten years ago.


Quick update to this:

Being a really close window (from December to January) we kind of had to pick our battles. The idea was to do whatever we could fit in, as a runway for more comprehensive changes. Our January package will be alliances into faction warfare, and defect fixes such as the silly standings bug.

That should be a good start, leading up to what we're looking into next, which is "why would I bother to take space?". We're dealing with the comment in your quote, but it's not possible for the January patch.

How about fixing the bugged plex issue where plexes fail to register it has completed and then despawn correctly due to the bugged timer (happens when timer is stopped by oposition getting on the button when you are on it)...

CCP Optimal
C C P
C C P Alliance
#87 - 2012-01-06 15:26:42 UTC
The weird undock / ships / items buttons behavior(showing up while in space, not working etc.) some of you have mentioned is a defect as you shouldn't be able to move those buttons at all. It has been fixed, but you may have to clear your cache for the fix to kick in.
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#88 - 2012-01-06 15:28:21 UTC
I have my "ships" and "items" buttons at the bottom of the menu bar when I log in. But I don't seem to be able to reproduce that when I move them around - and I can't put any other icons at the bottom of the menu bar, either. What's the intended behavior here? :-)
Asthariye
Angry Mustellid
Lost Obsession
#89 - 2012-01-06 15:30:10 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

The primary problem facing the Faction Warfare system is a lack of effective rewards for encouraging players to go out and fight, coupled with a lack of consequence and lack of meaning to the occupation of enemy faction's systems. Simply put, any fighting that goes on amongst the factions right now is completely arbitrary and grudge-driven, NOT mechanically driven. The "I'm fighting you just because" carrot went rotten years ago.


Quick update to this:

Being a really close window (from December to January) we kind of had to pick our battles. The idea was to do whatever we could fit in, as a runway for more comprehensive changes. Our January package will be alliances into faction warfare, and defect fixes such as the silly standings bug.

That should be a good start, leading up to what we're looking into next, which is "why would I bother to take space?". We're dealing with the comment in your quote, but it's not possible for the January patch.



With respect, if you can't do it properly, don't do it at all and wait until you have time to make a proper job of it. Fixing the silly standings bug (and thank you for acknowledging it is in fact a silly standings bug, it's only been around for a year and a half...*sigh* ) is great, but alliances in FW is not a fix nor is it a helpful addition at this point. Right now it is a way to make things worse, not a start to making things better. Adding alliances to FW, if you want to do it at all, is the last thing you need to do on the path to fixing FW. Not the first. It is akin to finding an injured person with a broken leg who also wants a boob job, and figuring that as you haven't got time to fix the broken leg, you'll do the boob job. It's silly.
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#90 - 2012-01-06 15:42:10 UTC
Questions for all the doomsayers.

AFAIK, there are already unofficial alliances in FW. That is, groups of corps who work together inside the same militia, sharing channels, standings and so on. Why is it bad to let them form a proper alliance inside FW?

Why is it bad to let established RP alliances, who have been taking sides in FW all along, to join FW properly?

What makes you think large sov-holding alliances would be remotely interested in joining FW? What does joining give them that's worth the hassle of fixing their standings?

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644

CCP Optimal
C C P
C C P Alliance
#91 - 2012-01-06 15:44:22 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:
I have my "ships" and "items" buttons at the bottom of the menu bar when I log in. But I don't seem to be able to reproduce that when I move them around - and I can't put any other icons at the bottom of the menu bar, either. What's the intended behavior here? :-)


You aren't supposed to be able to move them at all; they are fixed at the bottom as they are scope specific (only available in a station)
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#92 - 2012-01-06 16:09:44 UTC
My idea is to make people fight by linking the occupation system to the isk making system. The incentives should be: "If you want to make more isk, go pvp more."


When accepting a mission from an agent whose system is owned by the enemy militia, you get 10% less LP.

If the mission is completed in a system owned by your militia, you get 10% more LP
Koratte
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#93 - 2012-01-06 16:32:09 UTC
Mystical Might wrote:

1.0+ maybe, but not too high.
Most of the militia corps don't actually have that high a standing.



Only the dirty, dirty piwates.

Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#94 - 2012-01-06 16:55:00 UTC
Can the stations recognise militia pilots as friendlies and not engage them if they shoot at stuff? :D One of the supposed advantages of belonging to a militia is the support of the Faction, so any corporation (NPC ones) that belongs to a given Faction shouldn't start shooting their militia if they engage a target. Unless that target has a high standing towards the corporation/faction. Think of th station camps!
Kaver Linkovir
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#95 - 2012-01-06 17:27:58 UTC
Silence iKillYouu wrote:
Not all alliance's will give a crap about FW
Only RP alliances who will be fun to kill lots.

Looking forward to any changes :)

Now we can make our own alliances and compete in alliance comps.
no Autoz aloud tho


Killing RP alliances is nice indeed. But I do think that it's not just going to be RP alliances that will take an interest in FW.

Partaking in alliance competitions would be a plus.

Jack Dant wrote:
Questions for all the doomsayers.

AFAIK, there are already unofficial alliances in FW. That is, groups of corps who work together inside the same militia, sharing channels, standings and so on. Why is it bad to let them form a proper alliance inside FW?

Why is it bad to let established RP alliances, who have been taking sides in FW all along, to join FW properly?

What makes you think large sov-holding alliances would be remotely interested in joining FW? What does joining give them that's worth the hassle of fixing their standings?


Yes, there are indeed already groups of players who work as you describe. This started to escape metagaming players using alts in the other milita to spy on the militia channel CCP gives upon joining a militia and has since evolved.

If established RP alliances wanted to get into Faction Warfare directly, they would have done so. As is these entities either influence the playingfield or individual pilots join Faction Warfare corporations for a brief vacation. So, not bad, just redundant and uneccesary.

What makes you think large alliances (wether or not they hold sov is a mute point since that line is arbitrary) wouldn't shift back and forth between the different fronts just because they can? It's the way to manage standings while in FW if you are just in it for a short time.

As is Faction Warfare is pretty much low drama for fast fights in small gangs with periodic large scale battles. Something I know most pilots actually partaking in the War part of Faction Warfare enjoy. Allowing alliances will bring with it entities that love to camp because the mechanics allow killing the enemy without any security standing hit and without gateguns or stationguns intervening. It would allow a host of entities that don't have the balls to go full on pirate to lurk around taking cheap shots at people actually trying to get good fights because they can still get into half of empire space and can simply change sides to mitigate any faction standing penalties. Particularly because the pvp activities carry the lowest faction standing penalties of all the activities in FW.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#96 - 2012-01-06 17:38:50 UTC
Bad Messenger wrote:
I doubt that any big alliance want to take free wardec upon them. If they want to blob militia they can do it as well without joining militia.

Also standing requirement for all corporations make it so hard to join, that it is not worth to see all that trouble.

There is no benefits to join militia, you can take missions with alts if that is reason why you want to join.


Here, finally, we agree on something ;) I personally don't think that we will see FW implode overnight, given the fact that many Alliances won't see benefits outweighing the drawbacks, or may not be able to join even they wanted to. And in the long run, I think Alliances SHOULD be allowed to join FW, with some provisions of course. The more targets the better in the greater scheme of things....arbitrary barriers to entry serve no one.

Jowen Datloran wrote:
This is such a bad order of priority.

How will you balance a game play that has been advertized as an introduction for new players into the world of PvP by allowing the wealthiest and experienced entities in EVE to exploit the same mechanics at their leisure?

"Luckily" FW mechanics are still so pointless that one can expect that alliances only will farm the heck out of the LP stores while shooting any idiot believing that their blue color actually mean something.


....yet here is the crux of the problem. It's not what's being changed, its the priority order. The reason I've spoken up so loudly about this isn't because I personally sense a doomsday coming - its that the community has been fairly clear if not on specific proposals, than certainly clear on what the core problems are facing FW. By pumping out the "quick stuff" without listening and responding to the community's greatest concerns, CCP risks alienating customers who care very deeply about the FW system, the FW community, and possibly affecting the spirit of what FW is all about.

If nothing else, CCP at least owes the dedicated pilots who have spent years trying to speak up about FW improvements a confirmation that they've heard the ones who object to this change, understand the risks inherent in allowing more people into a clearly broken system without fixing it first, and are taking steps to minimize harmful effects. Simply ushering this through without at least communicating that they have a master plan here will only exacerbate an already sore sub-community in EvE who has shown far more dedication to the feature than the developers have since its release.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#97 - 2012-01-06 18:01:26 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:

Bad Messenger wrote:
..There is no benefits to join militia, you can take missions with alts if that is reason why you want to join.

Which is, if you think about it, a pretty damn good incentive as they have been moaning about their precious sanctum spawn time and what not. Fill up available blue-sea systems with ratters and send remainder to make approx. same ISK (for a week until markets crash) doing FW missions.


By joining militia it makes incursion running much harder, and incursions are much better isk than fw missions and market crash does not affect incursion income much, also alliances do not get much tax income from fw missions but they get a lot from incursions.
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
#98 - 2012-01-06 18:10:16 UTC
Morgan North wrote:
Can the stations recognise militia pilots as friendlies and not engage them if they shoot at stuff? :D One of the supposed advantages of belonging to a militia is the support of the Faction, so any corporation (NPC ones) that belongs to a given Faction shouldn't start shooting their militia if they engage a target. Unless that target has a high standing towards the corporation/faction. Think of th station camps!


In militia your targets are opposing militia forces , when you shoot those no one cares so sentries on station does not shoot you.

But if you start to shoot innocent civilians who has nothing to do with militia or faction warfare sentries will start to shoot you.

So i do not know what you are proposing there, maybe it was that if you belong to militia you can harass civilians too?

So you want that being in militia is license to pirate on your own faction systems, i doubt that is good idea Big smile
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#99 - 2012-01-06 18:21:57 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Ciar Meara wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:


Quick update to this:

Being a really close window (from December to January) we kind of had to pick our battles. The idea was to do whatever we could fit in, as a runway for more comprehensive changes. Our January package will be alliances into faction warfare, and defect fixes such as the silly standings bug.

That should be a good start, leading up to what we're looking into next, which is "why would I bother to take space?". We're dealing with the comment in your quote, but it's not possible for the January patch.


Nice to hear although I am a bit sceptical about the whole alliance can do their thing also, outside cva I see alot of griefing power given to alliances but thats part of every opening of the sandbox I guess.

I would also (eventually) like to see more a concerted effort in creating a "frontline"(war) and "rear area" (strategic strikes) mixed in together with the meaningfully taken space where conflict is initiated by players and empires alike and can feed of each other.

but carry on...


Agreed. The capture mechanics are the second priority though, compared to the consequences of taking/losing space, which we're looking into :)


Thanks, Soundwave!! I wrote the post above before I noticed you had chimed in on this thread, I've been answering items in the order I come across them here. I appreciate your personal attention to this feature, and I think you'll be pleased with how having a healthy, dynamic Faction Warfare system compliments the greater fabric of the game when all is said and done, and hopefully it will continue to provide the smaller-scale, gang and sub-cap fleet based PvP gameplay that so many players crave whether they currently participate in FW or not. I promise you the work you're putting in here will pay off.

I still stand by my thoughts that this is a bit premature, that there are genuine risks, and I'm hoping that you've considered them. Maybe your team can clearly see given their set of tools that the standings requirement will ensure there won't be large-scale abuse of the FW system and community. If so, we'd love to know that. I totally understand priority order for things (My RL job involves managing a queue of service requests so I empathize with backlogs and triaging tasks) but a large portion of the FW community remains very apprehensive of Alliance involvement, its a highly controversial issue that is perhaps more divisive than any other. Any reassurance your team can give regarding this specific change will go a long way towards re-establishing a positive relationship with the FW community after years of being "on the rocks".

As to the consequence issue being prioritized over the capture mechanics (Cearain - I know you'll hate me for saying this) I think this is a wise choice. Even if plexes were empty rooms that simply limited ship entry and provided little "arenas" for battles of varying sizes, that serves the EvE community's needs for PvP on that scale. The problem is, of course, that most now don't see the point in bothering when there's a dozen other ways to hurt your enemy far more than changing the name-only occupancy of a system. Currently, even the roleplayers don't care enough about who owns what system to rally big defensives or offensives.

I can't wait to see Faction Warfare return to the function originally intended - new players and veterans alike should be able to hop into their rifters, stabbers, and phoons, find fights every night of the week in multiple warfronts, have choice as to what kind of PvP they want to engage in (What sounds fun tonight? Frigate roam through Bleak lands? or RR BS fleet to defend Auga...) and know that whatever they do actually affects the sandbox. EvE is sold around as being full of that "butterfly effect" but it shouldn't take years for a pilot to feel like they've achieved it.

Convince new players that the rifter piloting they do in their first few weeks matters despite knowing they'll never catch up to vets in skill points and you have a recipe for long-term subscription gold.

Looking forward to summer! Keep up the hard work!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#100 - 2012-01-06 18:38:20 UTC
Bad Messenger wrote:


In militia your targets are opposing militia forces , when you shoot those no one cares so sentries on station does not shoot you.

But if you start to shoot innocent civilians who has nothing to do with militia or faction warfare sentries will start to shoot you.

So i do not know what you are proposing there, maybe it was that if you belong to militia you can harass civilians too?

So you want that being in militia is license to pirate on your own faction systems, i doubt that is good idea Big smile


Messenger is spot on here, FW is about fighting militias, not random neutrals.

We have BECOME a group that is often associated with piracy, because the dwindling number of FW pilots has caused a lot of bored militia corps to resort to *ahem* "keeping systems secure from suspected enemy combatants posing as innocents" Blink

That doesnt mean we should be aided by Concord during these "extracurricular" pew pew encounters.

What SHOULD be implemented (and is a great low-hanging fruit thing to add to a larger package of upgrades) is that the stations should fire upon opposing enemy factions. If the 24th crusade occupies Huola, that station should be firing on minnies loitering outside. This is common sense. It also doesnt punish new players too harshly, z-marks are very easily taught and can be used by any pilots of any skill point level.

It will, however, kill station games and push fighting back out into space where it should be. Just as with the Alliance fix though, the order here is everything: fixing station guns doesnt solve the problem as to why people should fight in the plexes to begin with. If it is implemented before plexing regains its meaningful impact, all it does is arbitrarily reduce where the militias can fight while we wait for real improvements.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary