| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Reply to Topic | Show CCP posts - 25 post(s) |
Kerchingo
    |
Posted - 2008.01.21 04:27:00 -
[361] - Quote
 Originally by: CCP Ginger
Originally by: Tharrn
If you want to make it the awesome version then please, please, please make it so that someone who has ****ed off a faction enough can no longer dock at their stations. Nothing turns me off as much as supposed enemies of Amarr being based out of the Emperor Family Station in Amarr...
This has been a hot topic of discussion here. There are alot of problems with denying docking rights to someone and the fact that the empires seem to have allowed each other to set up stations in their sovereign space is somewhat of an issue. But yes, its being discussed.
If this cant be implemented the whole concept of factional warfare topples
The design of the EVE universe as it currently stands is too rigid for this concept to succeed in an immersive and logical way so my vote goes to to 'leave it alone' and let the players drive the creation of 'eve history' instead.
|
Dex Nederland
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 18:11:00 -
[362] - Quote
Edited by: Dex Nederland on 21/01/2008 18:11:55
There has been a lot of discussion about the negative effects, but I have not seen any discussion about the rewards for fighting for a faction. These are important as actions should have consequences, but actions should also have rewards.
What does the pilot get when he signs up to fly under a national flag? What about a corporation and its members?
I think there was some talk of getting faction issued equipment as a reward/LP, but is the faction standing going to go up as well? If so what rewards will go with having a high (6+) faction standing beyond access to L4 agents?
Some ideas relating to faction standing:
- Corps with significantly high faction standing can mine moons in that faction's high security territory.
- Individuals/Corps with high faction standing can bring Capital Ships into some of the lower security (<8.0) high sec systems.
- Faction cyno modules (worth a ton, only usable by those participating in factional warfare), in order to bring capitals into some of the lower security high sec systems of your enemy.
*****
Changing gears
*****
On the issue of withdrawing docking rights from the enemy (those with low standing towards the owning faction), these should persist, even if you leave factional warfare. But the other problem is that those wanting to work for groups like Guristas need to be able to work for them sooner ;).
Something needs to be developed for those fighting in factional warfare if they are unable to dock in enemy stations - forward operating bases and firebases that they can setup in enemy territory as a place to store ammo, replacement ships & modules.
Think player created exploration site that is less than a POS, but not something the lone scout or even battleship wants to attack. The FOB would require a squadron of battleships with supporting vessels to take down in a fair amount of time. Stationary, lower HP, carriers with automated defenses instead of drone bays.
|
Argy
|
Posted - 2008.01.22 03:25:00 -
[363] - Quote
Edited by: Argy on 22/01/2008 03:30:15
in terms of keeping PvP optional for miners, traders, etc., ther should be a way to declare yourself neutral, or non-combatant. I dont think that, if you are not a combatant, you should just be able to fly around everywhere if you are associated with a faction (which everyone is). People should have to delcare themselves neutral to travel accross borders between factions, or at least traveled unarmed. if someone is trading between factions, or hauling anything, they should need a license, unless there's an embargo, but that gets to complicated. I think people or more likeley corporations, in empire space, should have to declare themselves civilian/private or empire navy, and that would dictate if they can or cannot travel in other empire space, but can still enlist or unenlist at any/certain times.
i think people need more than LP as reward to fly for empire navies. they will need isk just to fight, and why spend their time making no profit. There should be a lot of LP and a simple ranking system with a monetary reward for killing enemy pilots, and there should be high LP low isk, hauling and mining missions. however, beyond objectives like "take [random 0.1-0.4] boarder system" where one would fight empire rats and any players who are in that system. I think simultaneous small gang orginization is too complicated. the real fighting shouldnt be mission based however...spontaneus fights in low sec empire among small gangs seems lie a good constant
however a overall, dev controlled plan of war that has objectives for player run, empire navy-enlisted corps/alliances, like "defend/take this system" or trading objectives. this would recreate the dynamic of fleet war and small skirmishes in 0.0 space if there was an enemy corp that was assigned to the same system. these objectives could last really forever, and 0.1-0.4 sec systems could eve be unaffiliated with empires, and just let player corps battle in them forever.
i think massive amounts of LP shouldnt merrit ship blueprints, but ships, so veterans of FW can be seen flying cool faction ships, maybe even tech 2
ALSO
enlistment should be rewarded with LP or equipment or ship BP but this could easily be scammed so how would scamming of enlistment bonus be combatted?
|
xergher
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 01:05:00 -
[364] - Quote
Sorry if this has been suggested already, but it seems to me that there's an easier way to look at this as regards docking with xyz faction stations; if the standing with a particular empire in empire space falls below a certain value then you can no longer dock at that station, regardless of which part of empire you're in. If the station is one you have too low a standing with, you cannot dock, regardless of where it is, because quite simply, you'll be told you're not welcome.
For example, in real life there are embassies dotted around the world, if someone with high standing with that nationality goes there, they will be more welcome, even though perhaps, the empire (or in this case country) may declare you illegal/criminal. Naturally real life isn't that simple and agreements are made etc. but as far as EVE is concerned, it could at least initially operate on a simple basis until an improved method is decided, or even required.
So if you are for example Amarr and you try to dock with a Minmatar station in the Amarr empire space, you will be refused, however if you are in Minmatar space and you try the same thing but with an Amarr station, you will be permitted. Would make a lot of sense really that your best standing faction, regardless of location, would allow your docking, even though you may be in "enemy territory".
As far as Concord is concerned I don't think their duties would change overly, they would prevent attacks on faction ships within the faction empire space. For example, a Caldari miner is mining in Caldari empire space and a Gallente pilot attacks, Concord would chase off (or destroy) the aggressor. If Caldari to Caldari, same again just as Concord do now. Exception being, if a Caldari pilot attacks a Gallente pilot within Caldari space, Concord will act exactly as they do for Corporation wars, they'll sit there and see who wins.
The dynamics of this would be rather complex, but would see this as a foundation; pity though that the faction traits are such that Caldari don't have mining vessels (check the skill requirements for developing Exhumers, they're all Gallente Starship Engineering) and so on.
Think for the most part this would work.
|
General Paul
Atomic Heroes
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 01:13:00 -
[365] - Quote
I currently have a -9.97 standing to guristas.. I aslo live in Guristas space (Venal)
I have a large number of ships and all of my possesions in a guristas station.
So lets see.. if I cannot dock at guristas stations what happens to all of my things.,
There are no other factions to dock at for maybe 20 jumps of 0.0
My alliance holds together in the surrounding systems to me and wont come 20-30 jumps to a faction that likes me.. allowig people to take aprt in factional warfare and completely destroying someones game is two seperate things.
So for anyone who says it is a simple mechanic think again.
The fact that I have been living peacefully with the guristas for 4-5 months should really have mitigated their hatred of me but it hasnt.
If this none docking idea is to go ahead though id like alittle warning to start moving my ships and equipment to somewhere else 
Allowing me to choose my factional allegiance based on where I have lived for the lst 5 months would be a big plus though..
|
TordenSkiold
|
Posted - 2008.01.26 22:55:00 -
[366] - Quote
I think Ginger pretty much listed it well at War is Devine.
However, as the number of Eve players constantly grow, Empire is getting a bit over-crowded. Indeed Eve itself is showing symptoms of it.
Factional Warfare may therefore also be used as a part of expanding hi-sec into low-sec, and expanding low-sec into 0.0.
And of course 0.0 must also grow into new regions.
Factional warfare need to have a purpose, a goal, a reason behind it. Otherwise it'll be to much like current mission running: you do it for ISK, items/bonuses, standings etc., not so much because it is fun . . . so it's kinda like working, and not so much like playing 
-.. - .... .-.
|
Fleshen
|
Posted - 2008.01.27 00:11:00 -
[367] - Quote
I was thinking:
I dont pvp that much or not at all but I do want to PVP but cant afford it.
So i had an idea. Maby if you paid your faction some ISK and theyll supply you with a amount of pree fitted pvp ship packages fitted with lets say t2 stuff only or t2 stuff as far as your skill goes. This I think would really boost interest in PVP since people wouldnt be afraid of going to PVP. I really have more to say about this idea but Ill just leave it at this and hope it seeds someones imagination.
|
Teyrala
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.01.27 11:33:00 -
[368] - Quote
I will start by mentioning that I am completely uninterested in FW, and I know many people will think the same, so we need some way to avoid it, just as if you want avoid lagfest blobs, don't go to 0.0, and there is a need to avoid FW for people who don't want it, otherwise it will just ruin the game for them and they will stop playing, which means lost subscriptions of course.
So, these are the ideas:
1. If systems/stations can be taken over, these should be limited to 0.4-0.1 so as to avoid any one empire being completely destroyed (after all, everyone hates amarr, I wouldn't imagine they would last long)
2. Players should choose to be associated with FW. Also, corps/alliances should also be able to as well (roleplay corps/alliances)
3. FW should work like wardecs in that it allows pvp to occur in highsec between participants, but in highsec it should not be possible to take over systems.
4. No capitals in highsec, people would just exploit that to get highsec capitals to then use for other uses
5. Denying docking rights - people not associated with FW should not be denied docking
6. NPC FW corp - as well as joining FW as a individual/corp/alliance, perhaps people should be able to join the NPC navy corps, which are part of FW.
 |
CetusOfAsuran
|
Posted - 2008.01.28 03:57:00 -
[369] - Quote
hmm this seems interesting and many diverse ways around it, as mentioned there has to be a definite goal set out start with a faction chat channel and a faction "agent" available for chat in EVERY faction station where you can get that factions current goal which my be "conquer jita" obviously you cant have every player signed up to FW on the same missions as one goal would create all out 10000+ ship warfare so make certain goals only available to your earned rank. Rank increases from private through to admiral depending on your kill/loss ratio and goal achievements. This would mean you could go hunting opposing faction players at a risk whenever you feel.
this creates the problem of players not signed up for FW simple really if a player isnt signed up to FW that player remains protected by the faction navy and CONCORD and any FW player who kills a non-FW player takes a rank loss for killing a "civilian".
as for the station "ive got low standings with that faction blah blah" why? if you have got a low standing with your "parent" faction you have defected to the other faction so sign up for their navy instead - keep all factions open to all races not just caldari navy for caldari etc if a player wants to defect to another races navy so be it thats war!!! at the expense of being blocked from the opposing factions stations, choose your side carefully.
|
Enough Fiber
|
Posted - 2008.01.28 11:25:00 -
[370] - Quote
Edited by: Enough Fiber on 28/01/2008 11:26:32
The game design team must have a.d.d. as they have already started to think up ways to mess with the carebear via asteroid belts. Please design and release factional warfare before working on the belts.
There should be enough banter about release of factional warfare, but sure you don't need the carebears with pitchfork running throughout jita/rens stations screaming "only you can prevent forrest fires." 
|
|
Naomi dupont
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 11:18:00 -
[371] - Quote
How about an Intaki faction, or somehow make a FW branch pointing towards the posability of creating a Intaki Faction, it could be done, and maybe the faction will crumble and turn to dust cause lack of support, or prosper because of increased interest from the dwelling intaki's out there.
I remember i heard something about "npcs" shouting in local at some system and then, beeing blown up by concord or someone, but i could imagine if just once in a while these 'outbreaks' from the normal local standard rutine were implemented more often, and chained together, maybe linked from system to system.
Imagine a coupple of npc terrorists, or refugees from one faction, trying to escape into some borderzone, and the local faction npc general shouting, (stop in the name of the emperor, someone stop them, 50 mill to the one who brings their heads, and then the pod pilots could try out the hunt, if they had the right standing, and started to talk to the Concord general, that suddenly turned agent.
It could allso be linked together so the oposite faction suddenly shouted out a mission 'to resque the refugees'as a counter FW mission.
then we would have a lot of pvp/npc going at the same time, with story line involved.
I think my point is, try to make something that can involve players that were not even seeking FW, but suddenly their system is in a blaze of great pew pew and glory, ships blowing up, and with concord like fleets mixed with pvp pilots and the lot, but offcause making it a pod pilots choice to delve into the fun/risk.
Making the FW part alot "random" like, so its not just a new great complex thing, where someone allways blocks the gate with cap ships,(low sec FW) and exploiting the reset funktion again and again.
 STATIC VS  SPORADIC
|
Yon Andon
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 22:13:00 -
[372] - Quote
The already is a player run "realm vs. realm" type of thing in eve although it's not nearly as active as it should be it has great potential, the pirates vs. pirate-hunter fight. How about making FW only about that?
Say the pirate factions decide to invade low-sec empire and set up a few stations there (appear at first startup after FW expansion). Those with standings with those pirate factions and those with a decently negative sec status can get pvp-missions from an agent there. Others get pvp-missions from special concord agents in an empire low-sec station
Here&s a simple example:
Pirate A goes to Serpentis station and gets a mission with a description something like this
Pirate Agent: "Our sensors have picked up an area of interest for our conquest of this system. It's in deadspace but one of our technicians is working on an acceleration gate that can bring you to it. We've managed to make one access card for it for you to use so be ready to activate the gate when our technician has configured it to take you to the area"
The pirate-hunter gets a similar quest but with a Federation Navy Technician instead of Serpentis obviously and get also a key to access a gate.
The gate's only for a specific ship size depending on lvl of agent and the key is consumed upon activation.
When two players of opposing faction with such a mission of same level arrive at their gate both technicians will be ready and the players can warp and shoot it out. Who fights who is decided at the gates not when you accept the mission to minimize wait time. Both get a minimal reward for taking on the fight for their faction but only the winner gets a nice bonus reward.
I know this is as close as you can get to being instanced and maybe what you call pvp-lite but when pvp action in low sec is a little as it is now perhaps some basic assumptions about game design should be revisited?
Higher lvl mission would be more group oriented and a lvl 4 one might be that two corps of opposing factions need to put up a POS in the system, defend it and take out the other corps POS? Could last two weeks or so. Get bonus for putting it up, having it still there after two weeks and biggest bonus for destroying the other one.
Anyway this is becoming a rant you see the point i'm making :) so anything that gets ppl into low-sec shooting at one another is a good thing :)
my 2 isk, thx
|
Siri Blue
Gallente
Arachnea Phoenix Battalion
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 12:01:00 -
[373] - Quote
The first 2 posts by Eshud Uktar on page 11 pretty much hit the spot. Thats the way I imagine factional warfare!
Re-Introduce Non-ISK-Mission rewards, please. |
Eade Amtyre
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 11:39:00 -
[374] - Quote
Sorry if this has been mentioned already, but wouldnt it solve a lot of problems if factional warfare took place somewhere else?
I know this is not ideal, but what if either a number of wormholes are found in empire.. or new stargates setup.. which lead directly from empire space to a new region(s)? Perhaps these regions are not even based around solar systems as other regions are but instead around strange phenomena in deep space.
The new territory is valuable to the empire races for some reason and they immediately claim it and thus warfare in those regions, at least, breaks out.
Each faction controls and patrols the systems around its access point.
The new space is essentially 0.0 except that you cannot attack people of your own declared faction and it cannot be conquered by alliances. Even the pirates could join in later with their own gate/wormhole from their region of space..
|
Ademaro Imre
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 02:25:00 -
[375] - Quote
What might this do to standings for mission running? I am Caldari and if I participate in the FW - my minmatar standings will get tanked, so what happened when I try to transport stuff to a low sec system I need for access to 0.0 with my corp/alliance? Suppose I fight for Minmatar, then does my level 4 caldari agent standings get screwed? If I would want to participate, I either lose my level 4 agents, ot never go to our corp's "base" in a low sec system without a large gang.
The aim of politics is to keep the populace alarmed and clamorous to be saved by menacing it with imaginary hobgoblins. The urge to save humanity is a false front for the urge to rule it. |
Jmanis Catharg
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 11:16:00 -
[376] - Quote
Originally by: Ademaro Imre
What might this do to standings for mission running? I am Caldari and if I participate in the FW - my minmatar standings will get tanked, so what happened when I try to transport stuff to a low sec system I need for access to 0.0 with my corp/alliance? Suppose I fight for Minmatar, then does my level 4 caldari agent standings get screwed? If I would want to participate, I either lose my level 4 agents, ot never go to our corp's "base" in a low sec system without a large gang.
Pshaw,, sorry for picking you as my unfortunate victim here, but I *really* hate this "But my standings will go down" attitude when addressing killing other faction ships.
Consider this: As a mission runner for caldari/minmataar (who dislike each other), you've killed tens of thousands of their people, and you expect them to like you?
This:
Quote:
Opposing Faction navies will take a sudden dislike to you fighting for their enemies. The pansies who currently take you on will most likely get fired and replaced with people who know how to shoot.
Is what I've been waiting for. Long live the caldari, burn Gallente pigdogs!
Now, slightly more on-topic to the issue at hand, it's kindof a shame that this is centered around low-sec. I like that low sec is part of it, but I feel hi sec should be a better part. The reactions I get from young nooblets when I'm double-teaming customs guards at hi sec gates with my remote-repping alt and my combat main just passing through busy hi sec systems saying "Wow man, that's really cool, you're taking on the cops", even though there's nothing special about the feat, would be really cool for retaining newcomers, and give them something worth playing towards. The further they progress the missions, the closer they get to popping those <insert scumbag race,, *cough gallente cough* /> ships.
|
Cragen o'mass
Caldari
Free trade for freedom
|
Posted - 2008.02.09 16:17:00 -
[377] - Quote
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer
this is my idea for factional warfare.
You basically chose to purchase a privateerFs license from you races government. Now by doing this you become flagged to the opposing races enlisted privateers (like a war target) your reward for this is the loot from their destroyed ships, LP from chosen faction also 50% of market value of ships destroyed in hard isk.
Now why under the banner of privateer you can not dock at stations belonging to the opposing faction. Depending on faction standings maybe not enter certain systems dependant on sec status. Participants could be asked to only work in certain areas of space (constellations) including home space or enemy territories. By doing this you will ensure that PrivateerFs from both factions will be present at all times forming some kind of war zone. How ever faction warfare wouldnFt be inclusive of this area i.e if you see a target on the way you can still shot it.
To stop signing up then dropping contract a 24 hour timer would be in place, similar to War Dec timer. Also maybe add a faction penalty when leaving.
Privateer license price could be negotiable depending on your faction standings.
Sry for my poor writing skills but I have a head ache and English isnFt my strongest point.
---------------------------------------
I Think everyone @ tiscali plays WoW |
Gogela
Caldari
The Edge Foundation
Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 07:00:00 -
[378] - Quote
IFm really excited about the prospect of Factional Warfare` but IFve noticed a couple of comments here that compels me to throw in my own ttwo iskv as well.
The fact that there are empires that have allowed others to set up stations in their space is a serious technical problem` I can certainly understand that. My concern is that anything short of relocating those stations to a more appropriate location will take away from the game experience. The question is, is this technical hurdle worth improving the end experience of EvE. I certainly think it is. If that means another delay so be it` better than warping around and seeing a blatant work-around every day. 1500 station relocations may inconvenience a lot of players for a few days and the devs for god knows how many` but wonFt it be better when everything is making good sense? WonFt that also free up the devs possibilities for future improvements and content` not to mention a coherent storyline thatFs supposed to evolve? Maybe the great empires dissolve their council and claim all stations in their space as their own. There has to be an answer here beyond a wonky patch that causes more long term limitations.
I also liked the post suggesting low sec boarders between empires. It makes sense (read: lack thereof seems illogical). The strongest counterargument IFve read seems to be the dangers that might pose to new players. I would argue each empire has a LOT of space. Plenty to get some decent frig or cruiser skills that will get you through low sec (most of the time). Remember when you were starting out in EvE` remember how suicidal going into low sec seemed? What if it was just two or three jumps you had to make to get into that greener grass on the other side of the fence? ItFs good motivation to explore EvE and take that first leap! I think the new players will like that little edge to empire travel. It may also help take the load off of Jita, as new players will find another station to congregate around. I know when I first started out I lived in Jita just because it seemed like thatFs where the players were! If I had to run an ibis through lowsec it might have been another story. Remember: new players buy stuff too, and they will buy things in their own space if someone is there to sell it to them.
On a final note, I think there is tremendous opportunity for CCP if they take the brilliant infrastructure theyFve built w/ EvE and started campaigns in a story with depth that constantly evolves and sweeps up individual players into the story more intimately. For instance, missions` even storyline missions with 5 parts, are pretty two dimensional. How hard would it be to write a storyline mission through factional warfare that had 17 parts or more? IFm thinking like the tFreelancerv campaign` it would be fun and exciting` like a game within a game. As you add missions of this type you would be adding content that takes a long time to complete and engrosses the individual in his own little adventure. After a few years of adding more and more of these types of missions, you will be hooking players for the long term because people will be subscribing to a game that is constantly providing more games. It could never get old! In that way CCP and EvE would become something of a game distribution network rather than just a game that is always patching.
DonFt get me wrong` IFm already hooked. Love the game btw :D. I just thought IFd drop a few thoughts cuz` why not?
------------------------------------
"A hungry man will tell you anything if you give him a cookie." |
Daallie
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 10:01:00 -
[379] - Quote
Well the whole idea that it can be turned off is really really really dumb it should effect everyone. Now race should not determine this but loyalty so who you are running missions with and who you are fighting against effects everyone. If you end up with low amarr standing you will be shot by the amarr in amarr space, not be able to dock at their stations, but then this brings an issue of rewards from helping out someone. So this means tag drops or something else to indicate the action against a faction can be turned into Faction Navys for isk, LP, ships just something to make it a worth while venture to fight for a specific side.
This would also mean that the Faction ships would be balanced. No more getting my Pirate Alt perma jammed because I was stupid and undocked in 0.5 in a ship all of a sudden I could actually fight back YAY!!!!
Also makes the whole origingal story line of the faction wars and creation of Concord something worth while. Also QUESTION: what would we do about Concord. With all the factions going to war Concord seems silly all of a sudden. I have no ideas on it yet just saw it as an interesting issue.
|
Ma Zhiqiang
Minmatar
Huang Yinglong
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 14:13:00 -
[380] - Quote
Originally by: Eshud Uktar
My thoughts about Faction Wars are that it can't be made lightly.
I second these thoughts made by Eshud Uktar on page 11...
 |
|
BlondieBC
Minmatar
Rising Knights
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.22 23:48:00 -
[381] - Quote
I would like to see faction t2 items in the lp stores. They should be useable only by toons with high enough faction standings. (i.e. caldari navy t2 cruise missle launcher requires a 5.0 caldari faction standings.)
I would also like to see a fleet issue version of all ships both t1 and t2. These should only be useable by people with high enough factions standings.
|
Aeo IV
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 08:47:00 -
[382] - Quote
The only thing I have to say is; if there is factional warfare, we need a good reason for it, like the Eve gate reopening or such.
|
Dranoel
|
Posted - 2008.02.23 15:42:00 -
[383] - Quote
Edited by: Dranoel on 23/02/2008 15:43:09
If I remember correctly, CONCORD derives their power from the Yulai Convention. The Yulai Convention will have to be nullified for the war to begin. Does this not legally mean the end of CONCORD?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 12:24:00 -
[384] - Quote
Originally by: TordenSkiold
Factional Warfare may therefore also be used as a part of expanding hi-sec into low-sec, and expanding low-sec into 0.0.
And of course 0.0 must also grow into new regions.
Factional warfare need to have a purpose, a goal, a reason behind it. Otherwise it'll be to much like current mission running: you do it for ISK, items/bonuses, standings etc., not so much because it is fun . . . so it's kinda like working, and not so much like playing
-.. - .... .-.
The basic idea is good, but the area for expansion of empire in 0.0 should be a new area of space, not the already colonized 0.0 .
Players have spent time and resources to colonize the 0.0 that already exist. Changing it to empire would negate that work.
If instead new zones of 0.0 were added, with the statement from the start that probably (depending on the warfare results) they will become a NPC controlled region, no one that set base there could protest when the annexion to empire happens.
|
Dex Nederland
Caldari
Lai Dai Infinity Systems
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 16:47:00 -
[385] - Quote
Originally by: Venkul Mul
The basic idea is good, but the area for expansion of empire in 0.0 should be a new area of space, not the already colonized 0.0 .
Players have spent time and resources to colonize the 0.0 that already exist. Changing it to empire would negate that work.
If instead new zones of 0.0 were added, with the statement from the start that probably (depending on the warfare results) they will become a NPC controlled region, no one that set base there could protest when the annexion to empire happens.
So what about those players who have worked hard to colonize existing 0.0 for an Empire (CVA being the big example)?
If the players are the ones working to push the Empires into null sec and they have to achieve a certain level of development and security before the area is added to the Empires, how is that different from the S. Coalition pushing BoB out of Delve?
If the 0.0 player warlords want to invade the non-Concord protected empire space and remove the empire from that space they can. Concord's authority isn't suppose to extend out there, but there is no reason the empires can't begin to push out there without the approval of Concord with the help of their Pod Pilot communities.
Unless a LDIS Press Release is made, the views of its |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.26 12:52:00 -
[386] - Quote
Originally by: Dex Nederland
Originally by: Venkul Mul
The basic idea is good, but the area for expansion of empire in 0.0 should be a new area of space, not the already colonized 0.0 .
Players have spent time and resources to colonize the 0.0 that already exist. Changing it to empire would negate that work.
If instead new zones of 0.0 were added, with the statement from the start that probably (depending on the warfare results) they will become a NPC controlled region, no one that set base there could protest when the annexion to empire happens.
So what about those players who have worked hard to colonize existing 0.0 for an Empire (CVA being the big example)?
If the players are the ones working to push the Empires into null sec and they have to achieve a certain level of development and security before the area is added to the Empires, how is that different from the S. Coalition pushing BoB out of Delve?
If the 0.0 player warlords want to invade the non-Concord protected empire space and remove the empire from that space they can. Concord's authority isn't suppose to extend out there, but there is no reason the empires can't begin to push out there without the approval of Concord with the help of their Pod Pilot communities.
Simple, it is a bad idea because the activity of faction war would be at least partially directed and supported by the dev.
Any thing even remotely touched by a Dev that can result in changes or loss of control for zones of 0.0 will generate big problems.
|
the Entity
The Archaeological Squirrel Society
|
Posted - 2008.02.27 12:56:00 -
[387] - Quote
If any of this takes off,theres one thing for sure...
i get revenge on alot of you for making me read the walls of text!
I guess we'll see when it eventually gets here...
give a man a nut and he will survive a day...
give a man BALLZ and he will fight EVERY DAY!
|
Nyabinghi
Minmatar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.02.28 22:49:00 -
[388] - Quote
Don't know if this has been mentioned here yet but an obvious inclusion to Faction Wars has to be trade embargoes, and contraband between warring Factions. In fact as it stands now it makes no sense why Amarr would export goods to the benefit of Minmatar and vis-versa. Faction Wars will have to address this in order to have no gaps in logic.
***
|
Felix Isatia
|
Posted - 2008.02.29 01:04:00 -
[389] - Quote
Just an idea...I poted this in a new topic before realising this one was here
The player could/will be Neutral to the NPC and Players in the "Army Corp" until they so choose to join. Depending onwhich fation they join will alter their standings with the other factions. The player CAN choose to leave the "Army Corp" perhaps at any time or after a given "Service period".
To prevent empires from completely wiping another out...Introdude varying levels of NPC fleet sizes and defences dpendant on how much territory has left. eg. As an empire pushes deeper into its opponents territory the Oppsing fleet will gain gradually larger NPC fleets and more defences...both A) because players are less likely to join a losing faction and B) this represents the empires putting more effort into efending their Inner worlds.
On the Other hand the winning faction will over time have reduced NPC activity. Meaning at some point the fleet will consist mostly of players...the more player join the army...the further the push will go....the bigger the payout.
BEFORE this starts a declaration of war must be signed! a recruitment period will commance where empires will attempt to rally people to their side before the fight begins (Players can join ANY time during the fighting) and then both factions will send NPC fleets out to engaged and push agaist the other. Players can join in this. The declaration will also state WHAT system is their taget AND wich systems the fleet will pass through...to help players Join and avoid the conflict.
|
Brun Thorvald
|
Posted - 2008.03.03 04:03:00 -
[390] - Quote
Be aware of what hasnt worked in other games.
First of all, be very very careful of the Bandwagon Effect in PvP, where winners keep playing and losers drop out. I would strongly suggest tweaking PvP rewards so the 'losing' side offers more and better reward than the winners are offered.
Secondly, allow areas to actually change control. You dont want an Empire to be wiped out, but have a certain set of systems change control from being, say, 0.2 Minimatar to 0.2 Amarr would be cool ... even if this means some Agents get to move.
Thirdly, dont be afraid to end a particular FW after time, or if it isnt working.
Fourth, start small. Dont have entire Empires at FW at the start, just have 2 corps going at each other in a particular constellation. See how it works and tweak.
Fifth, you have a problem in that Blob Warfare works. I'd personally suggest linked missions, where the 2 gangs enter a particular area and NPCs blow the crap out of anyone without the Magic ID Card each side got issued ("Your ships have been issued with transponder IDs to disable the automatics. I wouldnt recomment going to the system without these. You are in cruisers or smaller, right ? I wouldnt guarantee the new transponder ID would fool the automatics if you went in in a battleship').
Six, yeah, FW should affect docking at stations and such. At the moment, Empire Space is Empire Space, and it only matters to RPers whether they are in the Republic, the State or wherever.
Seventh, unfair fights are not fun, and if it's not fun, then people stop playing.
|
|
| |
Reply to Topic |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |