These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Events and Gatherings Archive

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fanfest 2012 Breaking News: Factional Warfare

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pasocon Otaku
#81 - 2012-03-26 16:58:48 UTC
From an RP sense, I think DCs should remain with R&D agents -- which is what 'decreased' sounds like -- still there (but less).

I guess FW or whoever could be said to have their own (NPC) scientists, cranking out DCs to be bought with LP ... what I don't like is the 'multiple main sources' for a resource (DCs) -- you'll have one competing with the other, and see a Gresham's Law -type effect.

If a character invests 3-4 months on skill training and faction raising, it's not unreasonable to generate 400 datacores/month -- if they're top-sellers, that's 120 000 000 ISK/month. How's that compare with one afternoon of solo missioning, or an hour or two of incursioning? Roll

If CCP feels that relative trickle is still a bit too much for its level of passivity (training/factioning initially, setting up agents, picking up every-so-often, re-training when market demand switches to other DCs, switching agents ... ), might I suggest a simplified P.I. system? You set a cycle with your R&D Agents (say 1d-14d), which determines how many RPs they generate for that time ... then you have to log back in to re-set your cycle. Otherwise the same. Set the value of RP/hour such that the 1 day cycle is 120% of current, 3 day results in the same yield as now, while the 14d cycle is about 50-60% of the current rate. I think there'd be a large net drop in the number of DCs 'passively' introduced to the economy.
Nephilim Xeno
Order of Garrulor
#82 - 2012-03-26 20:05:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Nephilim Xeno
well looks like everything i just wrote vanished -.-
Sentinel Mantik
Second Star
#83 - 2012-03-26 22:43:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentinel Mantik
What about two stations (One for each militia) in a FW System.

Militiants only can dock in their station.
The stations are camped by NPC of the occupancy holder (makes docking/undocking harder but not impossible)
The NPC scale with the occupancy level
Neutrals can't dock on any of those stations

This is war-territory. If you won't be in a melitia, then GTFO of that System!

This should be WAR and not highsec or 0.0

Minmatar 4 life

German player.
Tanaka Sekigahara
United Space Marine Corp
#84 - 2012-03-27 09:02:39 UTC
CCP Navigator wrote:
This Fanfest presentation focused on bringing long term improvements to Factional Warfare. We first exposed the flaws currently present this feature, before moving on to suggestions on how to improve it.

• First in line is to provide proper consequences by denying docking access to stations located in enemy space and allowing players to upgrade their captured solar systems by spending FW LPs into the Control Bunker.

Great Idea. If nothing else, this needs to be done.

• We then discussed a general decrease to passive Datacore gains, as we want to add Datacore offers in the FW LP stores.

Why?Turning FW into another Isk faucet is not a good idea, nor is it to try and lure people into FW because they have to to do invention.Also kinda screws everyone who went and researched skills and then ground missions to get RP.

• After that, we approached the concept of War Zone Control, giving long term impact to this feature by adjusting Factional Warfare LP store prices depending on how well your side is doing in the war.

Meh, the problem with that is you are gonna have one side get buried and nor be able to dig themselves out ever. Losing access to stations is enough.the ability to run FW missions is also enough reward, and enough penalty if the systems that hold your factions FW agents fall, and you can no longer access them to run them to begin with.LP store changes are not such a good idea.

• We also discussed cosmetic changes, like removing Occupancy and causing Factional Warfare to affect Sovereignty instead, or renaming Control Bunkers to Infrastructure Hubs for consistency reasons with null-security space.

NO.we do not want sov warfare, or the game mechanics that come with it. No infrastructure exists, and rightly so. The change in title would be a misnomer.the title Command Bunker is appropriate, as that is all it really does, is signify and in theory excercise command and contol over the State assets in system.

• We approached the subject of Factional Warfare complexes, and how they should be improved by giving NPCs PvP like attributes while making sure they are consistent for each faction. We also brought forward the idea of giving LPs for capturing such complexes, that would be stolen from the enemy Infrastructure Hub in the system.

OK

• We talked about PvP kills, and how to make them more rewarding in Factional Warfare by giving LPs as a proportional value of the ship lost, plus its modules and cargo.

OK

• Lack of visibility is also a problem we would like to tackle, by improving the Factional Warfare Militia pages, creating proper leaderboards for players to compare themselves from, and improving system notifications.

OK

• The EVE-DUST link was also brought forward, as we discussed possibilities to have both EVE complexes and DUST matches affect a Factional Warfare solar system status.

No.
Trader13
NOT A FRONT
#85 - 2012-03-27 11:35:11 UTC
CCP Navigator wrote:

• We then discussed a general decrease to passive Datacore gains, as we want to add Datacore offers in the FW LP stores.


I am quite unhappy with this change.

EVE is a 'long view' game, you plan to play for years so often you'll do something now that you see as paying itself off in the long term. I know many of us (myself included) have spent the time to train for maximum data core returns on our accounts (3x characters with 6 agents each) and spent the time to raise the required standing for maximum gain.

Its no small investment in time and SP and has trivial isk/per hour when compared to almost every other way to make money in the game. It is done with the future in mind, much like buying a blueprint that won't pay itself off for years or training that last level of Advanced Mass Production to really squeeze everything you can from an account.

Surely there are other carrots you can dangle in the faction warfare LP store? As others have pointed out, it doesn't make sense that invention/industry supplies should come from FW. While I still completely disagree with the idea of even adding them, I think nerfing the passive accumulation is adding salt to the wound, the additional source of data cores that isn't limited by characters / accounts will likely reduce the price alone.

Is this change still under consideration or is it now set in stone?
Sentinel Mantik
Second Star
#86 - 2012-03-27 14:06:27 UTC
I think posting in two threads about the same is not that positiv.

Maybe a Community Representive can merge the thread in the General Forum and this one for that all discussion is in the same place. (or start a new one while closing the old ones?)

A quick overview what player-suggestions the DEV think about would be nice for those that had no chance to be on one of the round tables at fanfest.

Minmatar 4 life

German player.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#87 - 2012-03-27 18:25:03 UTC
Sentinel Mantik wrote:
I think posting in two threads about the same is not that positiv.

Maybe a Community Representive can merge the thread in the General Forum and this one for that all discussion is in the same place. (or start a new one while closing the old ones?)

A quick overview what player-suggestions the DEV think about would be nice for those that had no chance to be on one of the round tables at fanfest.



I agree. Let's make https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=85156 the place where we keep the conversation going.

Single thread is much easier for the developers to follow and will be much more effective in getting our voices heard. Thanks for keeping this constructive everyone! I need your help to keep the conversation and the feedback flowing. Get your friends into the forums to share their opinions!

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
yashik
The Great Awakening of Phoenix
#88 - 2012-03-31 12:35:27 UTC
R&D / datacore / passive income
- i don't like idea to lower it down,

1) price of datacores and theyr farming isn't that profitable as someone could think,
2) lot of time and skill investment for a small passive income wasn't worth that much as i expected

and now... it should be even less ?
i'm not too excited about this change, especialy when i bought 3monts ago second eve account just to train up alt for a slighlty more passive bonus, i know 80mil per month isn't too much, but at least it's 1,2frigates that i can buy and pop in pvp