Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That the connections inside a pod serve as both communications pathways and security wiring? (The Burning Life, p 30)

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]

Author Topic: Winter Preview: FW Iteration  (Read 9096 times)

orange

  • Dex 1.0
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1930
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #75 on: 06 Sep 2012, 20:53 »

I have no opinion on the mechanics of the cyno issue because I don't fly capitals and very rarely have found myself on grid with them (and not once in FW).  Having the jamming function resident in a defensible/destructible structure separate from the plexes and ihubs would be a neat addition though.

It has potential importance is to someone like me...  once upon a time I had designs on Urpiken.  Level 5 systems are almost equal to null-sec sovereignty and four is not too shabby.  The ability to protect fixed assets, like starbases from being hit with a capital fleet has potential.

It may be the difference between taking & holding R-16 moons and not.
Logged

Gesakaarin

  • Guest
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #76 on: 07 Sep 2012, 02:58 »

I've always failed to see how FW could be considered the, "Kiddie Pool". It has bred and attracted some of the very best small gang pvp'ers who have on a consistent basis pulled the pants down of supposed, "Elite" nullsec alliances who come into FW thinking they can just pop bubbles, anchor up and push F1 for killmails.

Yeah, the mechanics of FW have always been FUBAR and broken and it can lead to burnout with the whole plexing system but at the end of the day it's a way to get low-sec pvp without worrying about gate guns through a free wardec and frankly everything else is just a bonus.

Everytime I get out of FW I end up wanting to go back in again because the actual options for fun, high-contact pew pew outside of RvB really are limited at the moment. Yeah it might be protracted conflict with no real end in sight but aren't all wars involving equal opponents? War weariness, pacifism and decrying the pointless of the slaughter to think of all the children are all legitimate IC responses just as much as being mercenaries, privateers and patriotic freelancers are all legitimate RP careers in FW.

I think it's not the concept behind FW but rather some of the implementation and mechanics behind it that made it annoying at times for myself and others and the winter expansion seems to be addressing most of them, so it's all good to me. I don't think FW is the right place if you prefer RP with some measure of supposed impact and attendant ISD articles as you build sandcastles in your own corner of the sandbox.

People die and spaceships explode in FW - does it really have to be more than that?
« Last Edit: 07 Sep 2012, 03:00 by Gesakaarin »
Logged

Myyona

  • Spilling beans
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 520
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #77 on: 07 Sep 2012, 03:57 »

Ah, Innovation. Everyone says that they want it, but when it finally comes around it's greeted with the universal fail fanfare because it's not doing things like history has proven things should work.
Truth, right there.

Anyways, DUST can probably survive with a few THOUSAND active players, just as EVE has done. Who cares what they other millions are doing, that is not CCPs style.
Logged
EVE Online Lorebook at eve-inspiracy.com

Lyn Farel

  • Guest
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #78 on: 07 Sep 2012, 04:16 »

What I'd like to see is a bloody timer reset when the last button-pusher warps out. I suspect it'll curtail the hordes of no-risk LP farmers a fair bit more than most of the other changes.

Hell yes.  The natural state for the button should be zero seconds on the timer.

That would be cool yes.

restrictions for complexes

capital blobs

I don't follow.  Capitals can only deploy inside the minority of complexes that are unrestricted.  Suppose banning them from the FW systems altogether would prevent the threat of capital blobbing, such as it is, but I think the plex restrictions already accomplish the goal of channelizing and restricting PVP along the desired lines.

And, for the record, playing in the kiddie pool is extremely fun--as much if not more fun than swimming in the nudist lagoon of nullsec.

I fielded caps several times in FW when it was really interesting to do so or necessary, most of the time to kill bunkers and once to kill 2 pirate carriers at a gate, and I had that time one my biggest, adrenaline filled experience of all Eve, especially since it was supposed to be a suicide mission and we actually won.

What I mean is that caps warfare can be interesting and full of fun, but unfortunately the current state of the game means that only big entities have control over such things because of :cynoblob: (how I hate how cynos work, it's kindof of the core of the problem with capital blobs aka hotdrops). I too would like to see capitals banned from FW systems since it brings 99% of the time nothing but supercaps blobs and the likes. It does not happen in plexes, mind you. It happens at gates, stations, belts, wherever there is a fleet battle big enough. Or not even, sometimes people hotdrop frigates... Just for the lol.

What I would really like is just to see the system hub/bunker be the ACTUAL cynojammer. Once vulnerable, you can bring your caps in, and you have a day after the system is taken to take them out of here. I don't like really much this measure because it is quite extreme and limits the sandbox itself. But while the serious issues are still not being adressed - meaning, how cynos and capitals work and how to reduce blobs - it is in my opinion one of the best solutions available atm.

Thread is for opinions on the FW iteration.

Yea, including the bitter opinions.

vOv  I calls em like I sees em.

You can call it bitter if you want. I am probably. However I do think that most of my points are valid and I do not bitch for the sake of bitching because CCP nerfed my last favourite toy.

Quote

Oh, and the mentioned T1 cruisers and below only type of complex like they will do for frigates, to make T1 cruisers worth something in FW.

This was my first reaction, too, but I'm willing to wait on juicy new stats for the Winter cruiser rebalancing. Of course a 10 man T2 gang will outclass a 10 man T1 gang, but fights aren't going to happen based on equal numbers alone. Although it will mean a lot more Falcons - but let's see how ECM revamp is going to pan out.

As someone who's likely not to get involved in FW, take my opinion with as much salt/sugar as you'd like, but I think the "rookie plexes" idea should be expanded, and that plexes should be segregated into two groups for each 'size': restricted, and unrestricted (borrowing old plex terms just for simplicity, limited/unlimited would work well enough). Restricted plexes act like these "rookie" plexes: Basic T1 hulls of accepted sizes only. No faction, no T2. Just T1. Unrestricted would be, well, unrestricted in this sense: any hull of the appropriate size would be allowed inside.

The lack of a "T1-only" plex for cruiser-and-larger ships just seems like a Not Very Good Idea to me in general. If they're going to spend time rebalancing the things it seems even worse; rebalancing isn't always enough to get people to use something if the T2 or faction variations are still that much better.

That is what I think would be best too.

Ah, Innovation. Everyone says that they want it, but when it finally comes around it's greeted with the universal fail fanfare because it's not doing things like history has proven things should work.
Truth, right there.

Anyways, DUST can probably survive with a few THOUSAND active players, just as EVE has done. Who cares what they other millions are doing, that is not CCPs style.

While I wholeheartedly agree with the statement and the ideal behind it, I still think CCP are basically doing it wrong and will probably fail, to a certain degree, at least.

To use again the cinema parallel, artistic independant movies are not sold on the hollywood market, or they inevitably fail. They are brought to the public eye through festivals (like Venise or Cannes), which means, through the proper media.

It is the same for small independant games. You do not launch something like minecraft, machinarium, whatever of the same caliber, on consoles, period. That would be suicidal. And I don't think DUST is comparable to games like Ico, Journey, or exceptions like that.

Dust is not coming through the proper media to my opinion.
Logged

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #79 on: 07 Sep 2012, 09:51 »

I also think FW as a concept has ENORMOUS RP potential.  Let the players fight it out 'win' or 'lose' for the factions, and move the story along accordingly.  The PF always keeps it 'even' among the factions, and we could all do with a shake up and have a few of them getting their asses kicked to change the dynamic.

How much more exciting for all of us if the PF followed FW and there were consequences?

Giant goldmine of story lines relating to the Amarr losing the front, suppressing the knowledge among the populace perhaps... the Empress losing face and having to deal with uppity Heirs losing faith in her Military strategies, etc etc.  It's Vak A'tioth all over again, what's a loyal Imperial to do?

The Matari ascendent, victories on the battlefield... do they translate to a better life on the homefront? Are the tribes uniting in victory? Or are these spoils being rolled into further military endeavors as the population continues to suffer?

Etc Etc
Logged

Graelyn

  • Ye Olde One
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1349
  • These things just seem to happen...
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #80 on: 07 Sep 2012, 10:38 »

RPers wouldn't be involved at that point.

Large nullsec Alliances would be trolling the storyline at whim. FW is already the plac where the losers of Nullsec wars go to regroup.

ofc, some folks believe that how it should be (I sort of do). Just pointing out what would happen...
Logged


If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Silas Vitalia

  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3397
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #81 on: 07 Sep 2012, 12:55 »

RPers wouldn't be involved at that point.

Large nullsec Alliances would be trolling the storyline at whim. FW is already the plac where the losers of Nullsec wars go to regroup.

ofc, some folks believe that how it should be (I sort of do). Just pointing out what would happen...

CCP should troll back with epic NPC fleets :)  Show them the wrath of the Empress and all :P



Logged

Victoria Stecker

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #82 on: 07 Sep 2012, 13:05 »

Bait out a PL titan drop.
Responde with 300 Avatars.
Alpha kill titans.
Collect tears.
Logged

Esna Pitoojee

  • Keeper of the Harem
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #83 on: 07 Sep 2012, 14:13 »

The issue with doing that is that there would be an almighty whinefest on the forums in response. People regard FW as a place to go farm ISK, get easy ganks, and reform after defeat in nullsec. They do not regard it as a place to engage in an actual war - and God forbid the environment - or CCP - should actually fight back! The accusations of dev bias would be deafening.

/bitter

Logged
I like the implications of Gallentians being punched in the face by walking up to a Minmatar as they so freely use another person's culture as a fad.

Graelyn

  • Ye Olde One
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1349
  • These things just seem to happen...
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #84 on: 07 Sep 2012, 14:43 »

CCP should troll back with epic NPC fleets :)  Show them the wrath of the Empress and all :P

Unless the thin-client idea I've been ranting about for a year comes to fruition (it won't), then the EVE architecture literally can't do that.
Logged


If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Morwen Lagann

  • Pretty Chewtoy
  • The Mods
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3427
    • Lagging Behind
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #85 on: 07 Sep 2012, 14:47 »

CCP should troll back with epic NPC fleets :)  Show them the wrath of the Empress and all :P

Unless the thin-client idea I've been ranting about for a year comes to fruition (it won't), then the EVE architecture literally can't do that.

I'm pretty sure it has - they use what they call "thin clients" for local testing requiring large numbers of ships, iirc.

Probably could be adapted for such use with some work.
Logged
Lagging Behind

Morwen's Law:
1) The number of capsuleer women who are bisexual is greater than the number who are lesbian.
2) Most of the former group appear lesbian due to a lack of suitable male partners to go around.
3) The lack of suitable male partners can be summed up in most cases thusly: interested, worth the air they breathe, available; pick two.

Ulphus

  • Bitter dried flower
  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 611
Re: Winter Preview: FW Iteration
« Reply #86 on: 07 Sep 2012, 18:28 »


What I would really like is just to see the system hub/bunker be the ACTUAL cynojammer. Once vulnerable, you can bring your caps in, and you have a day after the system is taken to take them out of here. I don't like really much this measure because it is quite extreme and limits the sandbox itself. But while the serious issues are still not being adressed - meaning, how cynos and capitals work and how to reduce blobs - it is in my opinion one of the best solutions available atm.


I support this. If you said there was a distributed control system, it might actually make the whole plexing thing make some sense (if you squinted your eyes to make them go slightly out of focus).
 
Logged
Adult to 4y.o "Your shoes are on the wrong feet"
Long pause
4y.o to adult, in plaintive voice "I don't have any other feet!"
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]