|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
149
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 12:04:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm going to disagree with some of the above.
FW's stated goal is to be an introduction to PvP for low-SP pilots. Given that, I think it is entirely reasonable that the missions should be doable solo, and in T2 frigates. It is one of the main charms of FW missions, in fact.
It would make a lot more sense to me to make them all doable in Bombers and/or AssFrigs, solo, and if anything, scale the reward.
They should absolutely NOT require fleeting up, or BC+ ships to run, at least in my opinion. Leave them accessible to solo low SP pilots. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
150
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 15:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:I'm going to disagree with some of the above.
FW's stated goal is to be an introduction to PvP for low-SP pilots. Given that, I think it is entirely reasonable that the missions should be doable solo, and in T2 frigates. It is one of the main charms of FW missions, in fact.
It would make a lot more sense to me to make them all doable in Bombers and/or AssFrigs, solo, and if anything, scale the reward.
They should absolutely NOT require fleeting up, or BC+ ships to run, at least in my opinion. Leave them accessible to solo low SP pilots. PvP accessibility for low SP pilots does not necessitate access to L4 missions in bombers or assault frigates. Beware Malcanis' Law here. Low SP pilots can make more than enough to sustain their PvP losses by plexing. Even now, you can run 4x novices per hour easily, making 40k LP at tier 2. That's at least 40m per hour, which is solid income for folks losing ships in the 2-10mil isk range on average. FW L4 missions should require something on par to regular L4 missions in terms of skill / ship investment. If newbros want to run FW missions, the L1-L3 should be perfectly doable in assault frigates and the like.
What is the actual benefit to anyone for making the missions not doable in T2 frigates, though? I don't think there is really a problem there that needs solving, aside from the racial balancing.
Some people want a reason to do fleet PvE in FW, it seems. That seems silly to me, but whatever floats your boat. For stuff like that, why not add a FW-specific version of Incursions instead?
The missions serve a useful purpose besides the cash. They draw players very deep into the opposing territories. Making the higher level ones require coordination or having a much higher bar to entry would suck in that it would reduce the frequency of that dramatically.
Sure, I can understand not wanting it to be only bombers. I personally have a lot of fun hunting and killing mission runners in bombers, but people in FW not liking their stealth is at least arguable. So make some have deterrents to bombers but still allow Assfrigs or faction cruisers to be able to solo them.
And, lastly, running the L4s in frigs is fun now. A lot of fun. Actually the only fun PvE I have seen in Eve. It would be a shame to kill that. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 15:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:I don't have a problem going either way (easy mode/slightly harder mode) as long as the risk/reward is in line, at the moment the risk/reward is out of wack though.
Agreed. So, combining a few posts, I think:
- The missions should be balanced so all races can complete any FW kill mission solo in T2 frigs or faction cruisers.
- The reward scaling should be fixed, because as much as I like having an alt that can pull in several hundred thousand LP an hour, it's just wrong.
- CCP should consider adding a FW-based Incursion like mission system that requires fleet action. This could actually be very cool, if PvE is your thing.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 15:59:00 -
[4] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote: Comes down to risk / reward. At the moment, you gain far far too much for putting so little on the line.
I understand and agree with your point, I just disagree with your solution :) |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
152
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 17:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Flyinghotpocket wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:I'm going to disagree with some of the above.
FW's stated goal is to be an introduction to PvP for low-SP pilots. Given that, I think it is entirely reasonable that the missions should be doable solo, and in T2 frigates. It is one of the main charms of FW missions, in fact.
It would make a lot more sense to me to make them all doable in Bombers and/or AssFrigs, solo, and if anything, scale the reward.
They should absolutely NOT require fleeting up, or BC+ ships to run, at least in my opinion. Leave them accessible to solo low SP pilots. it IS accessible to low sp pilots its called lvl1 lvl2 lvl3 missions. being in fw doesnt mean you ONLY do lvl4 missions. FW already has t2 frigate t2 destroyer accessible missions. the lvl4s are the ones that need to get harder all around.
Why? Why not just scale the rewards better? That's the real problem. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 08:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
I think Webvan sums it up well.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 09:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
"I don't like the fact that people can solo something they can currently solo. My narrow definition of what is permissible in an MMO does not include this! NERF SOLO!" |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 10:29:00 -
[8] - Quote
Once again, Webvan speaks for me. Well put. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 11:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Look, it's simple.
There's only two things wrong with FW missions, otherwise they are *fine as is*.
First, the Gal/Cal ones are apparently not balanced with the Min/Amarr.
Second, the rewards are disproportionately large at Tier 4.
So just fix those two things. Make the Gal/Cal ones doable like the Min/Amarr ones, in T2 frigs; then make the reward scaling more sane.
They serve a useful purpose, are fun as is in frigs, and it is not bad to have SOME lucrative reward for a low SP L4; just not as much as it is now.
I'm sorry, but the insistence on removing the ability to solo them in frigs in this thread sounds like very standard MMO-crowd "Nerf Solo" whining to me.
If there is a strong desire for FW raid PvE content then I strongly feel that adding it as a new feature rather than bludgeoning current content into it is the way to go. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 11:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:just remove fw missions, no point to have those at all.
Actually it pains me to be defending PvE but there is. It incentivizes players to fly much farther into enemy territory than most usually do. |
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
154
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 12:08:00 -
[11] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:and it is not bad to have SOME lucrative reward for a low SP L4; just not as much as it is now. But this is already in the game in form of FW L2-L3's. Doable in assault frigs in pvp fits even. You get some lucurative reward, but not as much as L4's.
Well, no, actually it's already in the game for L1-L4. It is the desire to nerf soloing the last one that is both sad and predictable.
Meh, who cares. Bring on your blingy killmails, then :) |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 14:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:Deerin wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:and it is not bad to have SOME lucrative reward for a low SP L4; just not as much as it is now. But this is already in the game in form of FW L2-L3's. Doable in assault frigs in pvp fits even. You get some lucurative reward, but not as much as L4's. Well, no, actually it's already in the game for L1-L4. It is the desire to nerf soloing the last one that is both sad and predictable. Meh, who cares. Bring on your blingy killmails, then :) I don't think people really want to nerf things to the point where you can't solo. I also don't think people want to change the assassination style missions. They make sense in a lot of ways, lore wise and environment wise. But if L4 rewards are going to remain where they are, then the difficulty needs to be increased. Running them in 40mil boats to make 300mil+ per hour is simply out of whack. Force people to do something other than sig tank the things, and it'd be a lot more balanced. Aside from the ECM issues, I feel that Gallente missions are about in the right place. Get the rest of the factions up to that level and I think we're good. Other than that, revisiting / smoothing the Tier system in some way would be a good thing. Drives too many imbalances.
Nah, this is actually a pretty prototypical cry for nerfs. Humorously so, actually. We have a case here where all that really needs to be done, as you note, is to relax the ridiculous Tier 4 LP reward scaling to a more sane level, and maybe throw the Cal/Gal region an NPC EWAR/missile damage reduction.
Instead, we have people adamantly insisting that T2 frig soloing L4s has to end because REASONS, then waving the "Risk/Reward" flag as if it supports their argument, which would only be true if the Reward were required to be constant, which of course it isn't.
It's just like any other MMO nerf thread, really.
But like I said, meh. Go for it. It only tangentially affects me via my FW alt anyway. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 15:20:00 -
[13] - Quote
Charlie Firpol wrote: Why reduce the gains from lvl 4s when you could just do lvl 3s instead? There is no reason to decrease the income from lvl 4s, just make them harder.
I dont understand why you try to defend that so hard. It makes 0 difference for you if your lvl 4s get nerfed or you get "forced" into lvl 3s. But making lvl 4s harder would open a new playstyle, for the guys with enough balls to do the harder lvl 4s ini more expensive/slower ships for the old income.
Ahh, I think I see your confusion, I might not have been clear. I never said "reduce the income of the L4s to be the same as current L3s". I suggested making them more sane, instead of the current top tier scaling factor (what, 225% for T5 and like 175% for T4? I forget and am lazy.) They should still be lucrative, more so than highsec L4s, even if doable quickly in frigates. The risk is substantially greater even if the rats are easy. The rats have little to do with the danger here, after all.
The *only * reason I care about this is that they do draw players out to, frankly, be targets. If you take away the ability to solo L4s what I see happening is far fewer players doing missions in general, which I think would be unfortunate, as it pulls them all over the warzone.
I agree with everyone that the risk/reward is currently out of whack. Completely. With plexing too, for that matter. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 15:42:00 -
[14] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote: But like I said, meh. Go for it. It only tangentially affects me via my FW alt anyway. So, you have a farmer alt. How is your farmer liking the plexing changes?
No, mission runner actually. It's just not very important to me, hence tangential.
As for the plexing changes - I see those more as a whack to Astero bot hunters than anything, but that's another story :)
Deacon Abox wrote: Oh btw, the distinction is not between Gal/Cal v Min/Amarr, but between Gal & Amarr v Cal & Min.
I'm actually just saying Cal/Gal in terms of the Cal/Gal FW area, which I know almost nothing about, because the Amarr still seem to do fine, but now that you mention it, I have never flown missions as Amarr so I don't really know there either. My knowledge of mission running in FW is indeed purely TLIB.
Deacon Abox wrote: This would provide more chances of juicier Tengu kills than piddly bomber kills.
Agree that this would be an upside :) |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 15:49:00 -
[15] - Quote
Charlie Firpol wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:They should still be lucrative, more so than highsec L4s or the current L3s, even if doable quickly in frigates. The risk is substantially greater even if the rats are easy. The rats have little to do with the danger here, after all.
The *only * reason I care about this is that they do draw players out to, frankly, be targets. If you take away the ability to solo L4s what I see happening is far fewer players doing missions in general, which I think would be unfortunate, as it pulls them all over the warzone.
I agree with everyone that the risk/reward is currently out of whack. Completely. With plexing too, for that matter. Hunting stealth bombers doing lvl 4s is even harder than hunting plexing alts. There is really no risk when doing lvl 4s in a stealth bomber. True, you get more people out there doing missions when they are this easy and this lucrative but they could just as good be not there. They-Śre not more than another name in the local channel and you basically never have any interaction with them unless you hunt them and they start trolling you in local.
Actually they are pretty fun to kill and one of my (my main that is, this toon's) favorite challenges. I just got one the other night.
But you have a good point here. How would you feel about them being doable in AssFrigs or cruisers, but there being a bomber deterrent of some kind?
I basically just want to see them effective in pulling good numbers of small solo-ish ships around the warzone. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 16:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:But you have a good point here. How would you feel about them being doable in AssFrigs or cruisers, but there being a bomber deterrent of some kind?
I basically just want to see them effective in pulling good numbers of small solo-ish ships around the warzone. AFs would be ok I suppose, but balancing that would be tricky I think. The easiest way to prevent Bombers from being able to run them is to include fast webbing frigates. Which means your AF wouldn't be able to sig tank either, and it wouldn't take long for an AF to melt under a room full of fire.
There's other ways. One that comes to mind is that you would substantially increase the risk to bombers by applying the recent cloak changes in plexes to the FW missions too, for example. They would not be able to cloak up once off the button in the mission and would have to immediately blitz it, instead of closing cloaked first. This would work in some but not others.
You could also make the mission despawn if you leave the system, killing the trick of popping all your missions before running them. If the beacon was only up when the player was in the system it makes a much more prime target for other players.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.06 16:27:00 -
[17] - Quote
Verlyn wrote:CCP, if you go ahead and put a damp on my current way of being able to make enough isk to bring PVP to FW,
Then consider this option as well:
Up the LP reward considerably for PVP kills in FW.
I would welcome any change done to FW missioning to balance it out, only if that change above happened in tandem.
Because right now, getting kills in FW is purely fun value, but the actual skill and real experience it takes to be successful at it is given way less ingame reward than it deserves, imo.
So much this. I think they didn't because it is too obviously easy to game, though, by making an alt in the other faction. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
155
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 03:55:00 -
[18] - Quote
This is one of those times I wish we could post KMs. Hunting mission runners is fun. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 01:35:00 -
[19] - Quote
Well, that depends entirely on what the gameplay reasons for the missions actually are.
If the intention of the missions is to draw players in small soloish ships all over the warzone, which is as mentioned all that is important to me and is I believe the intent, then you're clearly wrong.
If the intent of FW missions is MOAR MISSIONER PVE, then you're right. But I doubt that is the case.
So, fix the rewards at ~T2. Problem solved. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 04:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
Baron' Soontir Fel wrote:I find it baffling to suggest that plexing is not an alternative to missions for FW. I have literally never done a mission
Sorry, but that is where I stopped reading. |
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 06:55:00 -
[21] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote: If the intention of the missions is to draw players in small soloish ships all over the warzone, which is as mentioned all that is important to me and is I believe the intent, then you're clearly wrong.
There ya go. That's not the intention of the missions. If it were, then Gallente missions would be soloable by small ships.
Nah, that just means the Gallente mission balance is broken, which we all agree on. All three others can solo them in small ships.
Nice try though. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 10:37:00 -
[22] - Quote
L4 FW missions are not high level content by any stretch of the imagination, and never were. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 11:53:00 -
[23] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:Well, that depends entirely on what the gameplay reasons for the missions actually are.
If the intention of the missions is to draw players in small soloish ships all over the warzone, which is as mentioned all that is important to me and is I believe the intent, then you're clearly wrong.
If the intent of FW missions is MOAR MISSIONER PVE, then you're right. But I doubt that is the case. This is kind of the crux of it IMO. You claim the first is the purpose of the missions, some of us claim the second. I haven't seen anything one way or the other that would definitively push things one way or the other. I feel that L4 missions are intended as PvE for FW players. Thus I feel the ship and SP investment should be roughly comparable to regular L4 kill missions, taking into account the increased risk for operating in the warzone. I therefore want L4 mission difficulty increased to somewhere between Amarr and Gallente level currently. Your position for everyone in bombers is reasonable given your take that FW missions = bring solo to the warzone. We just don't agree that you're right about the purpose of L4 missions. And yes, L4 missions are relatively high end content. Just not to bittervets like us.
You are right in that the only thing I am looking at here is the effects on the lowsec ecosystem. From my standpoint, anything that encourages or incentivizes large numbers of small craft flying around the warzone is a good thing.
I think questioning whether bombers are appropriate or not is totally valid.
The problem I have with the "but there is still L1-L3" argument is I don't think they provide enough incentive. L4 provides clearly too much though now, no question.
So I see this as a fairly simply problem of reducing current reward for L4 (and balancing Gallente, though as stated I know nothing about the Cal/Gal zone personally. I defer to you guys on suggestions for up there.)
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
156
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 14:44:00 -
[24] - Quote
Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:You are right in that the only thing I am looking at here is the effects on the lowsec ecosystem. From my standpoint, anything that encourages or incentivizes large numbers of small craft flying around the warzone is a good thing.
I think questioning whether bombers are appropriate or not is totally valid. I'm all for discussing the lowsec ecosystem. Just better to bring our assumptions / goals out into the light instead of saying "nuh uh!" back and forth - so props to you. First, I feel there's already plenty to incentivize lots of small soloable ships in low sec. FW plexes are still primarily run in frigates / AFs / destroyers solo, and the new Mordus rats has teams of guys in small fast ships out roaming around looking for them. The rebalance of the pirate faction ships - frigates and cruisers especially - has also led to a resurgence in solo / small gang use in lowsec. At least, those are my anecdotal experiences. To me, FW missions are designed to provide a purer PvE experience for FW pilots, in contrast to FW plexes - which IMO are designed more to incentivize PvP. If FW missions are designed to be FW PvE content to supplement the LP income from plexing, especially when at higher tiers where fewer systems are available to plex in, then IMNSHO they should be designed to follow the same progression (roughly) as regular L4 combat missions. That would mean requiring significant tank / DPS to complete - though given the higher exposure to PvP in lowsec, I fully agree that they should remain more assassination style.
I just keep coming back to thinking that AssFrigs are perfect for this. Look at it this way - the training time is similar to highsec mission runners getting in to (badly fit) BCs or BSs, the ships themselves are designed to fight the racial enemies (T2 shield/armor resists, etc), and having significantly more of them soloing around lowsec would be very good for everyone. It would maintain the current accessibility of FW to lower SP pilots even up through the L4 missions, and if balanced correctly would also be extremely fun to run in that ship (as they are now for Minnie and apparently Caldari). It fits the assassination theme well, too.
I agree that the relative impunity bombers have is potentially a problem. I have fun hunting them, but they are in general pretty safe. So that can be fixed by a game mechanic (anti-cloak in missions) or by simply excluding them from the allowed ships list on the missions.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
159
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 23:11:00 -
[25] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: Picking up Several Missions at One Time: The original intent was that the player would pick up a mission, go run it, and then return to mission base to turn the mission in. By picking up several missions at once, it makes it really easy for the mission runner to simply move on to the next one if the current mission is camped.
Yeah totally. I don't mind the ability to pick up more than one at a time, but things would be much better if they despawned when you left the system. Knowing (as a hunter) that the player was in-system if a beacon was up would make it much more dangerous for the mission runner. That would be great. The current tactic of popping them all then doing safe ones (which is obvious to everyone maybe the third time they do missions) is a significant factor that would be good to axe. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
159
|
Posted - 2014.06.09 23:37:00 -
[26] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Veskrashen wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:Well, that depends entirely on what the gameplay reasons for the missions actually are.
If the intention of the missions is to draw players in small soloish ships all over the warzone, which is as mentioned all that is important to me and is I believe the intent, then you're clearly wrong.
If the intent of FW missions is MOAR MISSIONER PVE, then you're right. But I doubt that is the case. This is kind of the crux of it IMO. You claim the first is the purpose of the missions, some of us claim the second. I haven't seen anything one way or the other that would definitively push things one way or the other. I feel that L4 missions are intended as PvE for FW players. Thus I feel the ship and SP investment should be roughly comparable to regular L4 kill missions, taking into account the increased risk for operating in the warzone. I therefore want L4 mission difficulty increased to somewhere between Amarr and Gallente level currently. Your position for everyone in bombers is reasonable given your take that FW missions = bring solo to the warzone. We just don't agree that you're right about the purpose of L4 missions. And yes, L4 missions are relatively high end content. Just not to bittervets like us. I think getting decent skills to fly a stealth bomber to run fw missions is not really easier than the skills to run level 4s in high sec. You had to train the fairly useless electronic upgrades skill to levle 5, as well as the frigate skill to level five. Torpedoes are a large weapon. And SBs aren't exactly easy to fit either. I don't think getting into a navy raven to run level 4s in high sec takes much longer. I think I was running level 4 missions in about a month after I started eve. Back then I did the whole "learning skills" bit too. It seems to me that to run faction war missions in a stealth bomber you have to train longer than you do to start running level 4 missions in high sec.
Agree, I made that point up above too, wrt Assault Frigates.
Another thing to keep in mind is that if you want to keep the assassination flavor of the missions, realize that if you beef them up you are probably just going to be replacing SBs with disposable sh!tfit T1-fit ganknados, which are even easier and faster to train in to and fit.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 09:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
10 pages of whining and I am still unclear on what problem you folks are actually trying to fix here. How does mission farming harm you (or FW?)
Frankly, this all sounds like sour grapes. Missions have no effect on FW victory points or anything else for that matter. If you want to "fix" FW, fix the unbalanced effect plex farming has on system stability, which is what really makes it hard for the underdog to flip systems. Missions are a nonissue, when it comes to the problems with FW today.
Hunting mission runners is fun. The button changes in kronos made it much easier. Hop in an intie and give i a try, if you haven't recently. When mission runners could recloak in-mission and had near impunity, sure, maybe it was too easy. But they fixed that.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 11:28:00 -
[28] - Quote
Sara Tosa wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:10 pages of whining and I am still unclear on what problem you folks are actually trying to fix here. How does mission farming harm you (or FW?)
it was started as a rebalance thread, racial ewar make missioning for specific factions extremely unbalanced between them.
oh yeah, that part I got, and that's reasonable. The races should be equally capable of SBing these things.
Sara Tosa wrote: then it become the old "lets bash pve".
As much as I will typically approve of bashing PvE in Eve, this thread seems to be simple, straightforward butthurt that people can make money in FW because... well, it's not exactly clear why. Some people seem to be upset that FW missioners are used to fund non-FW activities, particularly cap ships and above.
So, sour grapes. It boils down to the classic MMO "I do not like the way that other guy is having fun so IT MUST BE STOPPED."
Tough crap. HTFU and let others have their fun, and even better, hunt them down while they do it. It has no detrimental effect on FW whatsoever. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2014.07.27 13:39:00 -
[29] - Quote
Certainly. Scroll back up a few pages and you'll see me suggesting to balance them to be doable in AFs for all races too.
I still reject the idea that FW mission cash influx a priori harms FW. That seems like a non sequitur.
Now, the plex farming feedback loop benefitting the dominant side, on the other hand - that's an actual problem. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
168
|
Posted - 2014.07.28 06:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
People running FW missions have no effect whatsoever on the PvP aspects of FW, except as presenting themselves as targets for the occasional KM. Missions neither affect system status nor victory points. They may as well not even exist when compared to the rest of FW action as they are completely separate and unrelated. It literally doesn't matter how many people are running missions for LP, except perhaps for LP item prices in the market. Otherwise there could be 10x or 100x the current number of mission runners in FW and all that would change is an increase in nice KMs for the people hunting them.
So, other than racial balance issues, sour grapes mixed with maybe a bit of elitism. |
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
169
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 00:11:00 -
[31] - Quote
Cearain wrote: In any event I think we are getting away from the topic. Would you agree that if fw missions were nerfed relative to plexing then more people would plex? Do you agree that more people plexing would mean more people fighting for plexes?
No, of course not. That's total speculation, a complete nonsequitur, and in my opinion ridiculous. If you think the primary reason that the Amarr militia cannot flip systems is that the Amarr are too busy missioning, you need to spend more time in the war zone.
|
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
169
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 00:55:00 -
[32] - Quote
Really, if anything, the problem with FW now is that there is *too much* plexing. The reason that the Farmatar are an unbreakable brick is that once they hit T4, a vast armada of deplexing farmers have kept the systems easily controlled. Meanwhile, the Amarr would need to take a disproportionate number of plexes to compensate. If the recent weeks have shown anything, it is how utterly screwed they are.
Just like last year, this is going to continue until the Plex farmers are bored or rich enough.
Mission running is completely orthogonal to the problems facing FW. Totally unrelated. |
Miriya Zakalwe
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
169
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 11:36:00 -
[33] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Miriya Zakalwe wrote:Mission running is completely orthogonal to the problems facing FW. Totally unrelated. Then make it unrelated. Remove tier bonuses from mission LP payouts. Or make it totally related. Get rid of all current FW missions and make the agents give plex capture missions. Right now it benefits from bonuses while contributing nothing to warzone, No sir. If you want to reap the benefits of FW, please come and join the fight with your main, not with your 2 month old SB alt.
You seem to be confused. Tiers have nothing to do with warzone control. As posted above, it is possible to control nearly all systems in the war zone and still be at tier 1.
Tiers are gained by donating to ihubs. Which you would know, had you done it. This is usually done by mission runners (and to a lesser extent, plexers) so I would say that the missions are working as intended, tier-wise.
Nice try, though. |
|
|
|