Print

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

[Alain Colcer]

There is a consensus from the players to fix FW, there is not a consensus from CCP to review FW.

It will never be given proper importance because it is meant to be a "mid-step" between corps working alone in high-sec and null-sec alliances working across several corps. Its that simple.

So just exploit the system for the next 3 years as it is.

[Altantsetseg Naranbaatar]

It will never be given proper importance because it is meant to be a "mid-step" between corps working alone in high-sec and null-sec alliances working across several corps. Its that simple.

That just feels like a cop-out (regardless of whether or not it's really true).  I don't think any company working on any game should leave something so broken because it's 'not meant to be good'.  Especially in a game like EVE, where the main driving point has always been to find your own way to have fun, telling people they're supposed to 'Move on to X' when they don't want to is counter-productive.

I think CCP is really missing out on something that could be a big deal for EVE.  It feels like a lot of the stuff they've been working on recently (Incarna, NeX) is geared more towards pulling in newer players (which I think they're doing a terrible job of, but that's another post), and having faction warfare as another interesting and supported route for players to go would be an excellent addition.

As for the possible fixes addressed in this thread... I actually have no idea, since I'm not a FW person myself...  When I tend to think about it, I always redesign from the ground up (meaning CCP would never listen to my suggestions).

[Ulphus]

I would say that mission runners in cloaky, warp stabbed tengus, and stealth bombers with vigil alts are all part of the same problem: people who want nothing to do with pvp are gaming the system using ships designed to avoid pvp at all costs. Facwar is, at the end of the day, a Pvp feature, people should have to pvp to rake in large amounts of isk. They shouldn't be able to carebear the way they are.

A problem I perceived at the time I started was that there were loads of FW pilots who were there for the PVP who didn't care at all about the plexes. From a story point of view, this didn't make sense, so I put a character in FW to run plexes and avoid PVP. I was running plexes in the Minmatar FW regions. I ran no missions for the first 3 months, got no isk, did no pvp.

If your goal is not PVP, but "winning the faction war" then avoiding PVP is a legitimate tactic. Especially since PVP in plexes doesn't make sense for at least one side. If you're doing a defensive plex, then nobody is going to try to gank you unless they can cope with the NPCs as well, at which point you're probably over-matched. If you're doing an offensive plex, then your options are constrained for an engagement, and you should really bug out if someone shows up with an equal or better force.

The thing that bugs me the most about FW is the plexes resetting at DT, since I'm usually sleeping. If you can't make it to those fleets, then it is much harder to contribute significantly to the occupancy fight.

[Arnulf Ogunkoya]

Well, if people want it to be more about the PvP.

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

I'd also favour locking enemy militia out of opposing militia and fleet/navy stations. Though they should be able to use stations of corps from their own faction or neutral entities, wherever they are.

[Esna Pitoojee]

Alright, so before we go further - I started writing of an explenation of the means that I would see for abusing some of the tactics that have been suggested. Halfway through, I realised that this could come out sounding quite rude (i.e., "ur stoopid, ur idea is broken and dumb").

Just to make this clear, I'm not trying to say that anyone or their ideas are stupid. I'm just playing the devil's advocate, in an attempt to design an abuse-proof system (or at least abuse-resistant, since proofing is nigh-impossible in EVE) by using my viewpoint as an FW participant to explain how I think things might be used abused - hopefully we can then get around these issues.

Nonetheless, if any of you guys feel like I'm being rude/insulting/trollish, just say, mmmk?

[orange]

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

Some systems never see any change because they are out of the way and unlikely to see any substantial action.  Places like Sarenemi and Athounon would never see any change.

[Dex_Kivuli]

Well, if people want it to be more about the PvP.

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

I don't think this is a good idea. People would take throw-away alts (that they already use to spy on rival militia chat) and repeatedly gank them in contested systems.

[Arnulf Ogunkoya]

Well, if people want it to be more about the PvP.

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

I don't think this is a good idea. People would take throw-away alts (that they already use to spy on rival militia chat) and repeatedly gank them in contested systems.

I can see that. But people "game" the current system as well. Maybe you could refine the base idea to make this less likely?

Some systems never see any change because they are out of the way and unlikely to see any substantial action.  Places like Sarenemi and Athounon would never see any change.

If constellation occupancy resulted in some further benefits this might change.

Here's a thought.  What if you used the Incursion mechanic in a non random way to spawn core empire invasion forces in the border faction warfare constellations? The associated militias would naturally come in to support their side. If the invasion is repulsed within a set timespan the system stays with the defenders. If not occupancy changes.

This would also have the benefit of controlling where the major fighting would take place. As a result server resources could be concentrated on the frontline systems.

[Arkady Sadik]

Well, if people want it to be more about the PvP.

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

I don't think this is a good idea. People would take throw-away alts (that they already use to spy on rival militia chat) and repeatedly gank them in contested systems.

I can see that. But people "game" the current system as well. Maybe you could refine the base idea to make this less likely?

The biggest problem with that system that I can see is that the most efficient defense then becomes to simply not fight in contested systems. Whatever mechanic you use, you need to have some factor of "defenders need to actively do something to prevent Bad Things."

This is actually my main issue with FW. The current plexing mechanics actively discourage combat. First, the NPCs (like Ulphus explained) mean attackers will always need to bring some kind of overkill (even more so than usual in EVE). Even worse, effective plexing against NPCs means you need a PvE-geared fit - doing it in a PvP fit is actively gimping your efficiency. And I'm not (only) talking about solo plexing frigate fits. Second, effective plexing usually means that it's better to avoid engaging anyone in your plex and simply start running a different one instead.

Both of those mean that FW basically has two variations: Either you plex or you fight. During EM's time in the militia, we even had a "plexing" wing and a "combat" wing in our fleets. And that, is a silly mechanic.


My favorite first simply step would be to simply remove all NPCs from FW plexes, but then require a "max size" ship to actually capture a plex. I.e. T1 cruiser or T2 frigate for mediums, T1 BC or T2 cruiser for majors, T1 BC or T2 BC for unrestricted. Other ships simply can not run (or stop) the timer. Make the different plex sizes actually give different contestation VP while you're at it.

Some kind of overview somewhere on when plexes are actually run would be nice, too. A simple list of "Tararan, Medium, 12 minutes to go", "Brin, Major, 2 minutes to go" etc. would be great.

Also, faction ships should be treated the same as T2 ships as far as plex entry goes (return minors to T1 frigs and destroyers instead of Dramiels and Daredevils, and mediums to T1 cruisers instead of Cynabals).

Ceterum censeo post-DT plex shuffle esse delendam.

[Lyn Farel]

Even if I agree with the fact that offensive plexing means that it favors overblobing to avoid NPCs unbalance inside, I have to admit that when I started FW and the years after, it was not that much the case. Now, the main issue and problem is that people do not understand anything else than blobs. Honestly, I have incredible difficulties to find duels and solo pvp in FW (while pirates are actually more inclined to do it, had a T1 frig duel yersterday). It was not the case before. I have had countless T1 frigates/AFs nice fights in the past, now people just run away and avoid any "fair" fight, prefering to call for friends to simply gank. And this has been the case for the past year in plexing. Before that, even if it was already the case due to plexing mechanisms themselves, it was not systematically : had countless of nice fights in plexes.

Well, if people want it to be more about the PvP.

Scratch the plex/bunker mechanic entirely and alter system occupancy based on the kill rates each militia inflicts on it's opposition in those systems. Keep the profitable missions so that militia pilots have some means of funding their ship losses.

I'd also favour locking enemy militia out of opposing militia and fleet/navy stations. Though they should be able to use stations of corps from their own faction or neutral entities, wherever they are.

It would kill all the originality of FW, and at least half the interest I have in it.

[Kiki Truzhari]

Alright, so before we go further - I started writing of an explenation of the means that I would see for abusing some of the tactics that have been suggested. Halfway through, I realised that this could come out sounding quite rude (i.e., "ur stoopid, ur idea is broken and dumb").

Just to make this clear, I'm not trying to say that anyone or their ideas are stupid. I'm just playing the devil's advocate, in an attempt to design an abuse-proof system (or at least abuse-resistant, since proofing is nigh-impossible in EVE) by using my viewpoint as an FW participant to explain how I think things might be used abused - hopefully we can then get around these issues.

Nonetheless, if any of you guys feel like I'm being rude/insulting/trollish, just say, mmmk?

It'll be fine Esna, the idea here is to come up with good game mechanics, not for me to stroke my ego, if you have a solution you think of as better, point it out.

If constellation occupancy resulted in some further benefits this might change.

Here's a thought.  What if you used the Incursion mechanic in a non random way to spawn core empire invasion forces in the border faction warfare constellations? The associated militias would naturally come in to support their side. If the invasion is repulsed within a set timespan the system stays with the defenders. If not occupancy changes.

This would also have the benefit of controlling where the major fighting would take place. As a result server resources could be concentrated on the frontline systems.

I don't think that would work quite that well on its own, because I feel like the faction defending would farm the sites instead of quickly defeating them, which is the problem with Sansha incursions right now, and those don't matter in the scheme of things.

Okay, this is gonna sound like a really crazyish idea, but hear me out. Well, here's the non-crazy part first, since that might actually be a good thing to have ingame. Taking each constellation causes a defensive bonus and maybe gives the defenders some trickle passive income. If they're active in the warzone, and killing enemy ships, and taking sites and things, they earn LP based on the number of constellations their faction controls. This provides clear, obvious reasons for people to go out and actually help out, and to try and fight the war. You toss in some objective based plexing as well, like the plexing version of sansha incursions, and Couple this with the mission changes I talked about in the OP, and you have some decent mechanics.

On to the ridiculous. You have enemy forces invade the border highsec and lowsec constellations of their opponent faction. When this happens, Militia forces can enter the highsec without getting killed and the systems drop into a combat state. The two sides battle it out and run plexes and combat sites and try to do as much damage or to mitigate as much damage as possible. When all is said and done, if the defenders win, that system is uninvadable for the next month, if the attackers win, the sec status of the systems in the constellation drops by .1, and when all the systems in that constellation have dropped into lowsec, the system becomes a normal facwar constellation, and when that happens a constellation on the other side gets 'targeted for increased defenses' at which point the sec of that constellation starts trickling up, continuing at a set rate until the entire constellation is highsec or the enemy militia manages to take one of those systems in that constellation. As sec status goes up, it becomes exponentially more difficult to take a system, meaning that taking a .9 might require a 1500 man fleet and several weeks of concerted effort, and taking a 1.0 in theory possible, but requiring more people in system then are online at one time in eve right now.

Now that idea is very rough, and very needing to be polished, and I know it would never be accepted because it destroys the precious status quo that CCP is holding onto for fear of carebear retribution.

[Katrina Oniseki]

I am not in a militia, and I have little desire to be, because at times it has seemed to me that system occupancy for contested systems was determined by who laid down the best smack talk. The amount of sincere effort and coordination involved in presenting IC and OOC smack in Intaki local seems to be some sort of new fleet action. They've got tacklers (trolls), bait (false noobs), DPS (insult professionals), and remote reps (yes men) in every smack gang.

On a more serious note, I think the biggest problem with FW has already been mentioned in this thread several times, namely that there is no real effect at all for conquering systems other than chestbeating. There's no bonuses or penalties to either side for operations within a conquered system. It's just a name change, which seems silly to me.

[Victoria Stecker]

The amount of sincere effort and coordination involved in presenting IC and OOC smack in Intaki local seems to be some sort of new fleet action. They've got tacklers (trolls), bait (false noobs), DPS (insult professionals), and remote reps (yes men) in every smack gang.

Thank you for brightening up my gloomy Monday morning at work.

[Arnulf Ogunkoya]

If constellation occupancy resulted in some further benefits this might change.

Here's a thought.  What if you used the Incursion mechanic in a non random way to spawn core empire invasion forces in the border faction warfare constellations? The associated militias would naturally come in to support their side. If the invasion is repulsed within a set timespan the system stays with the defenders. If not occupancy changes.

This would also have the benefit of controlling where the major fighting would take place. As a result server resources could be concentrated on the frontline systems.

I don't think that would work quite that well on its own, because I feel like the faction defending would farm the sites instead of quickly defeating them, which is the problem with Sansha incursions right now, and those don't matter in the scheme of things.

I'm not sure you understood me. You seem to think that I'm suggesting Sansha incusrsions. This is not the case.

What I am suggesting is CCP use the code and adapt it so that an invasion force of the opposing empire spawns in a FW system.  The attacking militia would be trying to stop the defending militia from running the sites spawned in this "Incursion." The sites would either be full of attacking fleet NPC ships doing logistical stuff, or be ongoing fights between the NPC's that militias could intervene in.

Also. This would allow non militia supporters to fire on enemy NPC's in support of militia pilots. Ideally this would make them go flashy to the miltias associated with those NPC's.

Okay, this is gonna sound like a really crazyish idea, but hear me out. Well, here's the non-crazy part first, since that might actually be a good thing to have ingame. Taking each constellation causes a defensive bonus and maybe gives the defenders some trickle passive income. If they're active in the warzone, and killing enemy ships, and taking sites and things, they earn LP based on the number of constellations their faction controls. This provides clear, obvious reasons for people to go out and actually help out, and to try and fight the war. You toss in some objective based plexing as well, like the plexing version of sansha incursions, and Couple this with the mission changes I talked about in the OP, and you have some decent mechanics.

On to the ridiculous. You have enemy forces invade the border highsec and lowsec constellations of their opponent faction. When this happens, Militia forces can enter the highsec without getting killed and the systems drop into a combat state. The two sides battle it out and run plexes and combat sites and try to do as much damage or to mitigate as much damage as possible. When all is said and done, if the defenders win, that system is uninvadable for the next month, if the attackers win, the sec status of the systems in the constellation drops by .1, and when all the systems in that constellation have dropped into lowsec, the system becomes a normal facwar constellation, and when that happens a constellation on the other side gets 'targeted for increased defenses' at which point the sec of that constellation starts trickling up, continuing at a set rate until the entire constellation is highsec or the enemy militia manages to take one of those systems in that constellation. As sec status goes up, it becomes exponentially more difficult to take a system, meaning that taking a .9 might require a 1500 man fleet and several weeks of concerted effort, and taking a 1.0 in theory possible, but requiring more people in system then are online at one time in eve right now.

Now that idea is very rough, and very needing to be polished, and I know it would never be accepted because it destroys the precious status quo that CCP is holding onto for fear of carebear retribution.

I doubt they'd do it because dynamic adjustment of sec status would require a whole new set of code.  Variations on existing stuff would, I presume, be easier to implement. I do like the idea that near enemy high sec should become acessible to attacking militia during an invasion though.

[John Revenent]

On a more serious note, I think the biggest problem with FW has already been mentioned in this thread several times, namely that there is no real effect at all for conquering systems other than chestbeating. There's no bonuses or penalties to either side for operations within a conquered system. It's just a name change, which seems silly to me.

Recently I will agree with you, but in the past Heth gave out a shiny medal to all FW pilots. Also some storyline progression was enacted when Heth sold occupied systems.