|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2185
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 21:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hrett wrote:Quote:Faction War Roundtable.
First up Fozzie revealed changes coming in the Summer Expansion.
Cannot cloak within capture radius of the button. Rats will respawn so you'll need a DPS ship to plex. Large Outposts being introduced (standard plex spawn rather than random)
Rest of the session was us REAL faction war pilots giving lots of ideas and feedback which I don't see happening as Fozzie did say we had all of 2012 dedicated to us so small fixes are the name of the game. From the link posted by Andre. Awesome. Very reasonable adjustments. Let's see how this plays out wrt. bots. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2186
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 22:38:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote: great, now stabbed farmers can escape even more easily because you can not hunt them with cloakky ship.
Damn, didn't think about that. Great observation. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2187
|
Posted - 2014.05.04 03:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Deen Wispa wrote:Flyinghotpocket wrote:damn. my hanger of assorted bc's t3's and commandships is finally gonna see some action that isnt on the undock or the other end of a cyno. not to mention my pile of battleships. yay. damn i need some farming alts to make all this isk back. anybody got any good macro programs? I wonder if we'll really see that many more BC fights though? I'm still a skeptic just because I feel like alot of people have been conditioned to fly frigs/dessies for so long that it's hard to get people to fly bigger stuff. It's like anything. If the other side it attacking a system that is actively defended, then yes there will be larger ship fights when the large plex opens up. Otherwise, it will be small skirmish stuff or alt farmers as it is everywhere else. Large will have tougher rat, so it's pretty clear it won't be farmed as easily as novice through medium.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2190
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 14:29:00 -
[4] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:And what's wrong with that? Why would the defender need to sit 19 minutes in a novice for no LP after the "attacker" has been driven off? What purpose does this serve, is it compelling and exciting gameplay?
It serves as a punishment for winning the engagement! How dare you run them out??!!
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2190
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 16:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Cearain wrote: I think you are right on this. But I do think it is a pve versus pvp issue. Ultimately the question is are you going to make the most progress for your faction by typically staying and fighting: pvp or are you going to make the most progress by avoiding other players: pve.
As a guy who has been in FW for a long time - the answer is fighting. For example: More was done to secure the warzone by recently beating the Caldari in Oicx, Enaluri, Innia, and Deven than by any number of afk plex farmers running stuff in backwater systems.
The map is not "flat" - it has terrain. And understanding that terrain is a major factor to being successful in FW. (The enemy is not defeated by taking Maintenault - it is defeated by taking Innia.) Of course, "defeat" is temporary since the Caldari can and will respawn in due time (due to FW mechanics, and willpower of the Caldari), but their recent losses have greatly affected the warzone.
I know you don't understand this stuff, but that's fine. You don't participate in FW and will therefore never "get it". |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2190
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 17:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Since inferno, Gallente has always had the ability to get the biggest blob to defend your home system. That is why you think that is so wonderful. Except when we fought Evoke. and then TEST, and then TEST and almost every Caldari FW corp and alliance. Being outnumbered and fighting against the odds are what makes this game fun. Leave "Eve Gladiator" and "Low Sec Fight Club" to others like yourself.
The rest of your post is nonsense and shows you do not understand anything wrt FW. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2191
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 18:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
Samuel Reaper wrote:X Gallentius wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:And what's wrong with that? Why would the defender need to sit 19 minutes in a novice for no LP after the "attacker" has been driven off? What purpose does this serve, is it compelling and exciting gameplay?
It serves as a punishment for winning the engagement! How dare you run them out??!! I too think that one 50mil SP character in a Comet should be able to defend a dozen plexes at a time against low-skilled characters in basic frigates. It is the height of absurdity to ask a pilot with lots of skillpoints to actually sit in a plex and run the timer down if he wants to hold it. He should be able to stop people soloing as many plexes as he can reach without ever having to do the boring scrub work the attackers will have to do to make any progress. I agree that the current system isn't ideal but the rollback fix is worse. Optimal option is to have two timers and whoever counts down there own one first wins the plex. Two low-skilled players in hookbills > 1 high skilled player in Comet - if the two low skilled players are competent.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2192
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 19:17:00 -
[8] - Quote
Samuel Reaper wrote:If they are competent and if they are working together. However, while those two pilots will possibly be able to take one plex while working together the solo guy in the Comet can still protect as many plexes as are within his range from any low skill soloers without ever having to run a timer down. The two guys in hookbills have to sit in the same place but the defender can be all over the map. Defenders will get a HUGE force multiplier through a rollback change.
What's the objection to dual timers, out of interest? As far as I can see they solve the same problems but without setting up a new more significant imbalance. In your scenario the Comet can only protect the plexes that the hookbills choose not to enter. We're back at the status quo. Yes, the defender gets a huge force multiplier through a rollback change. The multiplier is this:
- if he's willing to defend a system, then the other side has to bring more than him to start taking plexes. He's still not going to want to defend backwater systems (ok, somebody might, but not anybody I know), but he will be able to run off afk plexing alts in systems he cares about (home systems).
Dual timers - No different than the current system except the total engagement time is shorter. The defender is still punished (by having to run the timer) for winning the engagement (making the other guy run). |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2192
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 19:30:00 -
[9] - Quote
Samuel Reaper wrote:Running the timer isn't a punishment, it's the mechanism for warzone control. If you think that winning the engagement is all that should be involved why apply this principle only to the defender?
Timer rollbacks would apply equally to the attacker. Run the defender out and the timer starts heading back towards zero.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2193
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 20:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cearain wrote:I was thinking dual timers could also have roll backs. K.I.S.S - As one former PERV wisely stated - CCP has a hard enough time getting one timer right. Why force them into having two timers for each plex?
|
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2195
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 14:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Samuel Reaper wrote: Timer rollbacks provide a huge force multiplier but only to the defender. ... to the side trying to maintain the status quo, or the guy trying to grief the other side. Yes, most of the time the status quo is trying to be maintained by the defender, but there's cases where the attacker wants to do it as well. The attacker is also the guy who is most likely trying to grief the other side. Griefing is an honorable profession and deserves more tools! :)
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2195
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 17:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
Samuel Reaper wrote:Offensive plexing is griefing and running timers down in a plex is a punishment? Griefing is keeping the other guy from achieving his goal. Could be defensive or offensive plexing.
And yes, running down timers when the other guy will not fight is a punishment. I don't see why it is so difficult for you to understand. If the guy running down the timer decides to run, then the plex should move back towards zero if nothing else happens.
Doing so would encourage the players running the timer to defend the plex by providing a consequence to bailing. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos
2197
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 13:48:00 -
[13] - Quote
Rinai Vero wrote:Plex mechanics should not be modified with the intent of making FW plex easier to capture. That's what double timers and faster timer counts on rollback would do. Time to contest the plex should also give opportunities for pilots to reship and come back. I may bail from a fight that's a bad matchup, but intend to return for a more even fight.
On the other hand, if I run someone out of a plex I want them to be able to have that same chance. If I actually want to run the plex, I can stay there and deal with the time they've run up. With normal rollbacks, I might decide to pop another one in the system while the first plex rolls back to 0, then run it. These mechanics would be fair to both sides. Exact opposite. Timer rollbacks would make it more difficult to capture a plex.
|
|
|
|