Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shaalira]

Original Post by CCP Ytterbium

WINTER ITERATIONS

After looking into current mechanics and feedback there are a certain number of points we want to change on the system upgrade and war zone control systems.



WAR ZONE CONTROL EFFECTS


Current warzone control design is flawed as it does not encourage players to hold space, only to upgrade I-hubs when they need to buy stuff from the LP store to get massive reductions. Ideally we would want players fighting and struggling to keep control over their space, that is why we propose the following.

We would remove LP store price reduction in the new system, and only modify LP gained. As such, tier1 WZ would reduce all LP gains by 50%, tier2 would keep them on the same field as of now, tier3 would give a 100% LP gain bonus, tier4 150% and tier5 200% LP gain bonus. This would encourage factions to actually keep and maintain space to have the LP bonus rather than just push once in a while.


NEW SYSTEM COSTS

We are not particularly fond of how easy it is to upgrade a system currently. On top of that it is quite easy for attacking players to reduce upgrade level by attacking complexes in the same system due to how the bleed-out on the I-Hub works (this will be tackled further down below).

Part of the fix is to increase LP amounts required to upgrade a system to the new numbers mentioned below:

* Level1: 40,000
* Level2: 60,000
* Level3: 90,000
* Level4: 140,000
* Level5: 200,000
* Buffer: 300,000


NEW SYSTEM UPGRADES

As mentioned quite a few times, current system upgrades are a bit lame, as not really providing needed bonuses, especially in systems with no stations. Iteration would include:

Level1:
* +5 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 10% market tax reduction
* 10% repair cost reduction
* 5% manufacturing time reduction

Level2:
* +10 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 20% market tax reduction
* 20% repair cost reduction
* 10% manufacturing time reduction

Level3:
* +15 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 30% market tax reduction
* 30% repair cost reduction
* 15% manufacturing time reduction
* 10% reduction to starbase fuel cost

Level4:
* +20 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 40% market tax reduction
* 40% repair cost reduction
* 20% manufacturing time reduction
* 10% reduction to starbase fuel cost

Level5:
* +25 station manufacturing, copy, ME, PE, Invention slots
* 50% market tax reduction
* 50% repair cost reduction
* 30% manufacturing time reduction
* 20% reduction to starbase fuel cost
* Able to anchor Cyno Jammer


 CYNO JAMMER

As you can see above, the Cyno Jammer is back with a vengeance. However we took into consideration the feedback we received during Fanfest and various community channels, and it would work as mentioned below.


* Bought from FW LP stores as 1 BPC (total cost including manufacturing materials estimated around 100-130m ISK)
* Has only 25% hitpoints of the null-security Cyno Jammer version (thus about 4 million HPs instead of 16)
* Cyno Jammer is launched from the ship cargohold and deployed into space, requires the "config starbase equipment" role (this technically restricts all NPC militia members to launch such a structure - you have to be in an enlisted player made corporation)
* Cyno Jammer requires a spool-up time (5 or 10 minutes)
* Cyno Jammer automatically turn online once spool-up timer has passed, causing its effects to be activated for the specified amount of time
* May only be anchored when proper system upgrade has been met
* Only one Cyno Jammer may be anchored per solar system
* Cyno Jammer needs to be launched near the system Infrastructure Hub (between 5 and 10km)

Working conditions:

* An anchored Cyno Jammer automatically turns online after the spool-up period and works for 1 hour
* Deployed Cyno Jammer is automatically unanchored and destroyed if the solar system upgrade level goes below minimum requirements while it is active
* Deployed Cyno Jammer automatically unanchors and self-destructs once their lifetime has expired
* Cyno Jammers are considered as militia objects and may be shot by the opposing factions without any consequence (neutrals can shoot them but have to take a security status hit)
* Has same effect than null-security version - prevents Cynosural Fields to be created in the solar system as long as it is active


LP DONATION MAINTENANCE FEE

The more system upgrades a faction has, the more donated LP is wasted to maintain current upgrades. Technically this would mean a faction with no upgrade would get a 0% fee while donating LP to the I-hub, while a faction reaching tier 5 war zone control would spend 70-75% of its LPs into the maintenance fee before they are counted for the upgrades themselves.

This mainly done to offset the massive LP gain bonus when reaching higher War Zone tiers, and also provide diminishing returns to factions owning vast amount of space.


GENERAL CAPTURE CHANGES

Last but not least, we have a certain number of smaller changes that have been suggested and requested for a while.


* Reduce I-hub LP bleed from attacked complexes: I-hub currently lose 50% of attacked complex LP amount, which makes it difficult to hold a system upgrades. We would like to reduce the bleed out to 10% to make it less easy to reduce it. Thus capturing a Major site would only remove 3,000 LPs from the I-hub instead of 15,000 as it is today.

* Defensive plexing gives LP: as title says, but with a twist. LP amount is based on contested system % to avoid farming. Thus, a system that is 50% contested would only give 50% of the total LP amount available. Maximum cap would be set to 75% to encourage players to still be in the offensive.

* Attacking complexes don't pay anything in vulnerable systems: currently it is possibly to still gain LPs and VPs in vulnerable systems, not only allowing you to farm the system instead of taking the I-hub, but also give you a huge VP buffer as they keep piling up indefinitely. Plan is to stop attackers from getting LPs and VPs when system is vulnerable - we would still leave a small VP buffer for attackers, but nothing bigger than 100-200 VPs.


That's pretty much for this thread, as mentioned above, we have more stuff coming, but that will concern NPCs and FW complexes, both of which are covered elsewhere in the Features & Ideas Discussion forum.


Many thanks for reading this huuuuuge wall of text, constructive comments are welcome

[Shaalira]

CCP Ytterbium's original post.

Alright folks, as promised, here are some iterations we are planning for winter.

Remember, this thread will focus on FW NPCs and complexes, for War Zone Control and System Upgrade changes, please refer to this post.


FW COMPLEX CHANGES

After reading the feedback from numerous community sources (had to read this post again to make sure we didn't forget any good point), we acknowledge that Factional Warfare complexes need to be changed and are high in our priority list.

* Capture beacon location: first, we want to move the capture beacon closer to the room entrance (0-10km instead of 60-70km) to promote fights next to the acceleration gate exit point and being able to intercept incoming hostiles more easily.

* Unify capture range: having 10, 20 and 30km range depending on the complex size is confusing and not needed anymore if we move the beacon closer to the room entrance. Thus we would like to have a capture range of 30km for all sized sites, so it's easier to remember for everyone.

* Increase contested range: at the moment an hostile pilot will only contest a capture timer if he is within capture range (whose reach varies depending on the point above). We want to move the contested area to the whole complex range, which would mean as long as hostile pilot is within your room the capture timer would be paused.

* Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).


FW COMPLEX NPC CHANGES

We will be talking about complex NPC changes only here - we know FW mission NPCs need to be tackled as well, but for now let's focus on one problem at a time. Before we list the changes, the main activity we see for Factional Warfare is PvP. PvE should not override PvP in this feature, as such the NPCs need to be very specialized to meet the goals you mentioned in this thread.

* NPC attribute revamp: this means two things. First, making sure no faction has an advantage over another. For example, having some factions use missiles while other have turrets is a no go. The other is to make sure we prevent, or at least significantly reduce AFK farming without hampering PvP when it does happen. Current FW complex NPCs will be scrapped and replaced with new ones that have the following characteristics:

* Very low damage output - they can kill you if you stay in the complex without taking care of them for 15 minutes, but their damage potential is so small it won't hamper players if attacked by others while capturing.
* Very high speeds: no matter what your fitting is, they will catch you. No endless Benny Hill music scene anymore.
* No EW: no electronical warfare or any kind, as this would be destabilizing when PvP occurs
* Have Sleeper AI: that means they will change targets according to your threat
* Active tanking: NPCs will have an active tanking according to the complex size they are on to discourage players to tackle larger sites with undersized ships. For example, while Minor sites could have a frigate NPC easily killed in your own frigate, Major could have battlecruiser or battleships NPCs with a active tank extremely difficult to tackle on the same frigate.


Why do the active tanking point matter you say? Because:

* NPCs contest capture timer: as long as there is a NPC in the area the capture timer is paused, just like with an enemy player. Capture timer is only paused when attacking a complex. Defending a complex with NPCs of the same faction would not cause such pause. Coupled with the active tanking point above, it means that if you can't kill the NPC reasonably fast, you can't capture the complex.

* NPC number reduction: currently NPCs spawn by wave of 3-5 on a timer. Thus if you don't kill them in time you can be overrun by a large number of them. That was particularly a problem with EW NPCs, as while a few jamming NPCs is annoying but not a big deal, having 10-15 of them jamming you would prevent you from doing anything. Our goal is to change them to spawn sequentially one at a time, so the next NPC would not arrive until the previous one was killed. Again, PvE should not take over PvP in Factional Warfare.

* NPCs only spawn when no PvP is happening: NPCs spawn at a semi-random period of time, and only when the complex is attacked while there is no defending player. Technically that means NPC prevent AFK farming. NPCs do not warp away when a player from the opposing factions arrives. However, since they have very low damage and no EW, this shouldn't be much of a problem.

* NPC standing aggression revamp: it's currently very blurry to know when NPCs attack you and when they don't. Part of the NPC revamp is to have clear attack rules to know when they are going to attack you or not. A fallout of that is also to make standing gains from PvP / PvE more consistent in FW, as we have a lot of confusion with this as well. We still have to design details on this specific points, but there have been excellent suggestions on this thread we will look into.

[Ken]

So much yes. 

[ArtOfLight]

Huh...this actually looks promising.

I'm actually excited about staying in FW now.

[Ilsenae Alexandros]

 

I support this in the strongest possible terms. Everything about these changes are win on a win cracker.

[orange]

*Looks at LDIS's old haunts*

It is possible to make low-sec almost as industrially attractive as null-sec. 

[Shaalira]

If you're already in FW, I suggest getting your LP farming done with now.  The tier five cash cow won't be around anymore come winter expansion, along with the nigh-effortless 11-digit returns per player that each push has been producing.

Also, now would be a good time to stock up on faction gear obtainable only through LP stores.  Prices for, say, Hookbills, are at an all time low.  But that will change come winter.

[BloodBird]

If you're already in FW, I suggest getting your LP farming done with now.

HELL.NO.

I refuse. I've had a toon in FW almost as long as FW has existed, but I've never fallen to these cheap tactics to farm the system. I simply can't do it, regardless of how needed it may be these days. Ofc, this means that I've been working on funding my toon the old way, and has had financial issues due to that. But I still won't do it.

As for FW as it is now, we all know what a joke it is. I was not to terribly impressed with that one point about capture-beacon control range extending to the whole area (it will simply continue to encourage kiting over any kind of close-combat fit, just like things are now) but otherwise this made me cheer and yell YES at the top of my lungs. I'm seriously going to enjoy FW again once this comes about, I've found myself becoming less and less eager to take part, even so far that the one system I swore I would keep up fell, and I didn't care enough to even act on it.

What I might be doing however, is work up my isk in a different way, then fund my oh-so-obsolete standard T1 gear and hunt down a load of faction crap that none of the people flying it earned legitimately. It's going to be great.

Thanks for sharing this, Sha.

[Matariki Rain]

Not happy with opposition anywhere in a plex meaning the timer stops (oh, the tactics that'll cause), but apart from that it looks good.

[Lyn Farel]

I am quite mitigated about this honestly. The changes seem apparently very nice, like they seemed before Inferno. They also seem to take the exact same route with extremely complicated and convoluted rules, and the more complex the rules, the higher the probability for things to get completely out of control like they did. I find this new extensive and very rigid kind of design trend they seem to use now quite dangerous, like a double-edged sword.

Another question : how do we upgrade the general tier of the warzone ? By upgrading systems ? How many need to be upgraded for the tier to go up ? Or by capturing systems ? How many need to be captured ?

Otherwise it seems quite good overall.

__________________________________

However I am even more unsatisfied with plex changes. Some of them don't make any sense to me.

* Capture beacon location: first, we want to move the capture beacon closer to the room entrance (0-10km instead of 60-70km) to promote fights next to the acceleration gate exit point and being able to intercept incoming hostiles more easily.

I think it is better, but will also favor blobs entering the plex. Farewell to baiting tactics to catch a lonely prey inside. But I think it is still better that way though. It encourages people to fight, which is the most important.

* Increase contested range: at the moment an hostile pilot will only contest a capture timer if he is within capture range (whose reach varies depending on the point above). We want to move the contested area to the whole complex range, which would mean as long as hostile pilot is within your room the capture timer would be paused.

That sounds unrealistic. There was a whole strategic dimension with the old system where you actually had to be on the beacon to make it run AND to pause it if someone else is also here. It allowed people to stay in the plex and continue to harass the people running the timer even in lower numbers where they had to remain out of range. For example it was not uncommon to see people in stabbers unable to engage a bigger fleet around the timer but harassing them nevertheless. Or groups of long range ships unable to go fight at the timer because of the enemy superiority, but still able to harass them and shoot at them. Now, they can still do that, but the fleet at the timer has to kill them to run their timer...

Which sounds utterly stupid in regards to all the exploits that will inevitably happen : what prevent a lonely nanofit frigate or any costless shit to move around on the grid at full speed just to prevent the people to run the timer, while saying "trolololol you can't catch me you can't run your stupid timer" in local ?

Or even better, I can already see people in cloaked ships sitting somewhere in the plex and preventing it to be run because CCP somehow forgot about that case and did not forbid it, and people waiting for the next patch a few months years later to get that fixed.

Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).

Really good idea, except for the medium and large ones : why would people bring BCs in large ones when they can bring BSes, and why would people bring T1 cruisers in medium ones when they can bring faction/T2 ones ?

[Ava Starfire]

OMG!

I AM IN HEAVEN!

A plex for only T1 frigs, and another for T2 frigs and destroyers??

THANK YOU CCP!

[BloodBird]

OMG!

I AM IN HEAVEN!

A plex for only T1 frigs, and another for T2 frigs and destroyers??

THANK YOU CCP!

I'd love them more if they gave us one for T1 cruisers and below as well. Little point breaking out the good'oll Thorax if all the enemies in your plex size use faction and T2, you know...

[Gesakaarin]

Granting LP for defensive plexing is probably the best fix to the FW system on that entire list.

The rookie plex idea is also frankly win. People forget newbies also come into FW to try the ropes of pvp and there's nothing more discouraging than having to face Daredevils/Drams/Dessies in a T1 frig.

Also the moment I try to leave FW, CCP decides to make it awesome again in the next patch.

Damn it.

[orange]

OMG!

I AM IN HEAVEN!

A plex for only T1 frigs, and another for T2 frigs and destroyers??

THANK YOU CCP!

I'd love them more if they gave us one for T1 cruisers and below as well. Little point breaking out the good'oll Thorax if all the enemies in your plex size use faction and T2, you know...

Probably worth providing it as Feedback in the thread (or hopefully they are reading this).

I think it could be interesting to have the T2 Frigate Complex also be T1 Cruisers.  I realize they are not exactly on par, but I think it could lead to interesting fights.  A mixed Inty, AF, EAF gang roams around hitting complexes and runs into a balanced T1 Cruiser gang with a mix of Line, EW, and even Logis (for Gallente & Caldari this is really straightforward).  But that is silly.

[Ava Starfire]

OMG!

I AM IN HEAVEN!

A plex for only T1 frigs, and another for T2 frigs and destroyers??

THANK YOU CCP!

I'd love them more if they gave us one for T1 cruisers and below as well. Little point breaking out the good'oll Thorax if all the enemies in your plex size use faction and T2, you know...

Probably worth providing it as Feedback in the thread (or hopefully they are reading this).

I think it could be interesting to have the T2 Frigate Complex also be T1 Cruisers.  I realize they are not exactly on par, but I think it could lead to interesting fights.  A mixed Inty, AF, EAF gang roams around hitting complexes and runs into a balanced T1 Cruiser gang with a mix of Line, EW, and even Logis (for Gallente & Caldari this is really straightforward).  But that is silly.

Cruisers murder AFs, sadly. That is why the previous plexing incarnation saw AFs used very rarely. Why fly a 30m+ isk AF when you can fly a 6m isk cruiser that does everything better, and easily kills that same 30m isk AF?