| 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) |
Jason Edwards
    |
Posted - 2007.09.25 02:43:00 -
[241] - Quote
I think it'd be a great way to start up a sort of new storyline missions people could accept. Have it set up so gangs of 2 or more could join one of these storyline missions. Essentially the gang leader would come along. Join the mission and the whole group gets the mission. The mission than could just task them to some system. Where they are highly likely to come into contact with the other mission or missions which may be taking place. Which by taking the mission it makes all the people who are also on mission or attached to the factional warfare to appear to be war targets while in hi-sec.
I don't think it necessarily needs to be in low sec. As far as I remember it wasn't low sec on the borders in between the empires. That's where I'd expect the faction warfare to take place. It would be far more interesting for it to take place primarily in hi-sec. Plus it is "Factional WARfare" which typically if there is war targets in hi-sec there's no problem attacking them.
No obviously you'd need to take someone's side and then there will be relationship affects with who you are going out to kill. While building up relationship with the navy you are fighting for. With obviously loyalty points or whatever for the missions you are doing. So sometime down the road you will be able to buy a navy/federate issue megathron from the gallente in say the event you had sided with gallente. *Which I suggest  as then you would be fighting for democracy and fair life for all people.*
|
Callus Tacticus
|
Posted - 2007.09.25 02:54:00 -
[242] - Quote
Edited by: Callus Tacticus on 25/09/2007 02:55:57
Edited by: Callus Tacticus on 25/09/2007 02:55:08
I want to acknowledge CCPFs hesitation over doing anything with stations located in enemy space. Of course, I enjoy the idea of making them tconquerablev for your faction, but that is probably very hard to incorporate. There are many ideas to consider, but I hope that CCP does finally figure out something that makes sense for the game mechanics, as well as from a Role Playing point of view.
A few things:
1. CONCORD should be like a global peacekeeping force, it has been powerful during times of peace, but now with the wars breaking out, there should be lots of loyalists to certain factions in their ranks. CONCORD should lose most of its power, and be relegated to patrolling 1-2 tneutralv areas that players can use as trading hubs, etc. DO NOT MAKE JITA ONE OF THESE NEUTRAL AREAS! (Had to say it)
---------------------
2.With the loss of CONCORD as a major power, and with war being fought, all the raceFs navies should be beefed up, and take the place of Concord. If a noob, or other neutral party not participating in factional warfare is attacked, they arrive like CONCORD to punish the aggressors.
------a.As has already been posted by a couple of people, if you engage in factional warfare, with say, the Amarr, and are attacked in Amarr space you get full protection by the local navy. But if you have low standings with Amarr, and are attacked, nobody comes to your rescue.
-------------------i.There should be some tcontested areasv where the navies are too busy fighting each other, or not consolidated enough, to help out against two players involved in faction warfare instantly, but if there is a prolonged battle between two gangs, there is a chance some ships may show up to help. (Mainly this should be taken care of by a calling for help in local. But some NPCFs would be a nice touch especially if the next paragraph can happen.)
-------------------------------------------- 1.And if ships from both opposing factions fighting for the system show up` BIG BOOMS!!! There is some definite potential here, but I can see how it would be hard to write incorporate it/write code. But something along these lines would be very nice, and would provide some nice news articles about fleet battles that might feature some playersF names as involved in the fight. =D
------b.You should get Standings, as well as Loyalty Points or some other equivalent for the Factions, for destroying tenemies of the state.v Also, the FactionsF should have some sort of Geneva Convention equivalent so as to protect pod pilots from being podded in factional warfare. It should be like it is now with CONCORD, and the resident navy shows up and destroys your ship, and both fines you isk, and docks you standings for breaking the code of conduct between factions. Obviously this allows for casual players from not taking a huge risk with Faction Warfare. However, advanced players with factional warfare should have the ability to get their standings so low with the opposing faction, that they can be podded on sight. There should be a lower threshold for this in the tcontested areasv
-------------------i.The rewards should be based on a few factors, including victimFs standings with your faction, as well as where he/sheFs ship was destroyed. Destroying an enemy ship in your own factionFs space should give you lower rewards than destroying an enemy ship in the contested areas (less risk).
|
Callus Tacticus
|
Posted - 2007.09.25 02:57:00 -
[243] - Quote
3.Faction Missions- If you sign up for a Faction, you can gain access to a special set of faction missions. Perhaps it could be missions that send you into the tcontested areasv or into enemy space to complete. I would think there should be some sort of division here between casual Faction Warfarers, and those who wish to Role-play more.
------------a.Maybe you could get them from Officers in space who move around. Similar to COSMOS agents. These would be agents who reside in ships that can be alone or part of fleets. Perhaps there could even be one that sits in a Titan and gives out missions into low sec for players with capital ships or larger gangs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.Faction Officer Modules- Provide Faction Officer modules to players for completing harder objectives in Factional Warfare. Example: Mithoula Tekkan of the Caldari Navy who has a Raven that flies somewhere in the system of Isinokka, patrolling, gives you if you have reached a certain threshold in standings, can give you a Mithoula TekkanFs Cruise Missile Launcher. Similar to the COSMOS agents that reportedly will give you a Navy Issue ship if you have very high standings with their faction. This can be incorporated with or without having factional missions. I would like for these Officers to be non-static, and moving, but have a general patrol area that is only a system for lower level officers and a region for high level officers.
Alright` that is enough typing for now`
---------------------------------------------------------
But I also enjoy the ideas of some rewards that arenFt as USEFUL, but still would be fun to have as bragging rights, including medals, titles, or even ranks in the factionFs navy!
I will be back soon with #5` after I finish reading page 2 of this feedback thread.
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.09.25 12:34:00 -
[244] - Quote
 Originally by: Bruno Bonner
In support to Tharrn's comments, but also supporting current game mechanics and existing stations i would like to point the following:
Under the Youl covention, the creation of CONCORD and the Cease-Fire agreements between all the four core Empires i would have guessed the following were signed on treaties:
No empire or sovereign nation that abides to CONCORD rules can deny docking to any other pilot, not even criminals. However there is freedom of liberty on the services fees applied to said individuals.
Gate and Station Sentrys will only attack Criminals and Outlaws defined by CONCORD rules, individuals who are not welcomed in empires will not be taken care of by CONCORD fleets, however their Navies are free to deal with said tresspassers if they see fit.
So you see, increasing the cost of operating from an opposing faction's station should tripple so at least they comply to CONCORD agreements but make life a hell of a lot more difficult to said organizations. Today we also have the random navy spawn when someone with faction standings -5.0 or lower enter the enemy sovereign space. That also difficults moving freely.
The standings mechanics is already in place, just make use of it properly.
Bruno
Quoted for effect. Dont ignore this valuable tidbit of information for Factional Warfare
-
Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online |
Sylthi
Minmatar
Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2007.09.25 19:48:00 -
[245] - Quote
Faction based PvE missions, that have NOTHING to do with PvP. They are already there, in a respect; but they could use a SERIOUS expansion to them. This would mean that the factional warfare expansion would have something in it for EVERYONE; not just the PvPers (AGAIN).
On a personal note, I gave up on PvP as a main line back in early 2005. (Been playing for over 4.3 years now.) After 1700+ career kills, over 5 different characters, I kinda figured "What's the point?" PvP got REAL boring for me, real fast, after that. I know there are tons of players out there who will never tire of PvP and will always desire for it to be a central part of Eve. More power to them, I say. But there are places for that; they are called low sec and no sec; and they happen to cover MOST of the Eve playing universe already. For me however, and I am sure the 1000's of other players who would rather have nothing to do with PvP at this point; how about throwing us a bone into a major expansion such as Factional Warfare? I am much more into the financial part of Eve now. After all, MONEY is where the REAL power lies; not at the end of a blaster. >:)
*
* |
LordVodka
Earned In Blood
|
Posted - 2007.09.25 22:05:00 -
[246] - Quote
I havnt yet read the full 9 pages so I don't know if this has been proposed or not, but has it been concidered that factions could take systems from each other, like the amarr could push there way deep into minmatar space and claim sovereignty over them, but leave say 10 or so home systems that are unconquarable to each race so they still have somewhere to base out of.
I think this would be a very cool edition, and that maybe agents of neutral standings with higher lp rewards then usual could be in some of these conquarable systems. Then when hte controlling factions take these systems the agents are there factions to use untill they are pushed outa the system by another faction.
I think this would do a great job of incorporating pvp and pve, we'd need the pvp'rs to go and ake systems and gain the rewards in so doing then the pve players could come and hold down systems while they got to use the nicer mission agents.
 |
Flora Chase
|
Posted - 2007.09.26 20:16:00 -
[247] - Quote
Originally by: Tairon Usaro
The X-Trading
Everything Said
So very /signed its not even funny.
***** POS - 2.2 removed the drudgery! POS are now actually fun for many people! Use FW to expand their role in new and interesting ways, including using installations like NPCs get in their deadspaces.
* Sov Level. As a reward for helping a faction fight, let me use sov-requiring structures on starbases. For Exmpple. With sufficient standing and LP, allow on lining of cyno generator arrays if your declared for faction owns the system. OK, perhaps this should only apply in NPC 0.0
* NPC 0.0 There are several entire regions of 0.0 space owned by NPC. This space could trade hands without affecting the empire sandbox too much.
|
Axel Vindislaga
|
Posted - 2007.09.27 03:49:00 -
[248] - Quote
Seems like what is being searched for here is a happy amount of conflict. The players want everything and the DEVS want fun stuff with a minimum of game reconstruction. Just whack in a few war zone systems with some patrolling navies. These navies "pew pew" people with low standing. Allow players to move freely into these systems for some blasting. Have the navies creating and destroying the gates to remove campers. Simple. Right gentlemen lets go to war. 
|
Eraggan Sadarr
Phoenix Tribe
|
Posted - 2007.09.27 12:39:00 -
[249] - Quote
Originally by: Durente Galaica
I'm for a more proactive faction warfare. Allow me to explain:
If faction warfare comes into existence, it would likely come as a result from the weakening of Concord.
1) Dissolve CONCORD from its police duties.
2) Continue buff to Navies. However, the navy of each faction takes on the roll CONCORD did before factional warfare.
-Navy ships will still be at randomly different gates through their empire.
-If a person enters an area with low faction standing and avoids the NPC navies, he'll still be able to traverse the enemy territory. However, as the new local police will consider him outlaw, he'll also be responsible for avoiding PC players. As what police would warp in to save an outlaw?
-Security status dynamically changes depending on what territory you enter, as a relation to your standings.
This would be a simple and elegant solution to Factional Warfare. All that is required is to game design the exact cut off points for standings, write a back story, and perhaps introduce it through interactive player means rather than simply next patch everything becomes different.
In fact, this was what I was expecting when I first joined game and I was afraid to go into Minmatar space for that same reason.
What an elegant proposal. I like it :D
Eve Market Scanner
|
Connor Banks
|
Posted - 2007.09.27 15:42:00 -
[250] - Quote
Here are some ideas how to utilize the existence of faction ships in future faction wars. Instead of focusing how to penalize the usage of twrongv ships, how about giving a small bonus for piloting the trightv ship? The bonus could for example be connected to both your liked by and disliked by faction standings. Also, the racial skills could also come to affect the bonus.
Example:
A Caldari piloting a Navy Raven has a 5.0 faction standing with the Caldari state. The pilot also has a -5.0 standing with the Gallente.
The above example could give following bonus:
Both the liked-by and the disliked-by faction standing could be connected to the Caldari pilotFs ability to call in reinforcements under distress. The liked-by standing could determine the magnitude of the reinforcement. That is, the more the Caldari state likes the Caldari pilot the more and better ships will be sent to the pilot in distress.
The disliked-by standing could determine the time delay for the reinforcements to appear. This would mean that the more the Caldari pilot is disliked by the Gallente the faster the reinforcements will be deployed and arrive to the scene of action.
Further more, in this example the Caldari pilot also has some knowledge about Gallente ships. Given that the Caldari pilot has valuable information regarding how to operate Gallente ships the pilot should be given a small bonus when engaging Gallente. The bonus could then manifest itself via a small boost to both ECM and ECCM items towards/against Gallente ships.
End of example.
Thanks for your time!
|
|
Connor Banks
|
Posted - 2007.09.27 15:44:00 -
[251] - Quote
Here are some ideas how to utilize the existence of faction ships in future faction wars. Instead of focusing how to penalize the usage of twrongv ships, how about giving a small bonus for piloting the trightv ship? The bonus could for example be connected to both your liked by and disliked by faction standings. Also, the racial skills could come to affect the bonus.
Example:
A Caldari piloting a Navy Raven has a 5.0 faction standing with the Caldari state. The pilot also has a -5.0 standing with the Gallente.
The above example could give following bonus:
Both the liked by and the disliked by faction standing could be connected to the Caldari pilotFs ability to call in reinforcements under distress. The liked by standing could determine the magnitude of the reinforcement. That is, the more the Caldari state likes the Caldari pilot the more and better ships will be sent to the pilot in distress.
The disliked by standing could determine the time delay for the reinforcements to appear. This would mean that the more the Caldari pilot is disliked by the Gallente the faster the reinforcements will be deployed and arrive to the scene of action.
Further more, in this example the Caldari pilot also has some knowledge about Gallente ships. Given that the Caldari pilot has valuable information regarding how to operate Gallente ships the pilot should be given a small bonus when engaging Gallente. The bonus could then manifest itself via a small boost to both ECM and ECCM items towards/against Gallente ships.
End of example.
Thanks for your time!
|
Futher Bezluden
Minmatar
ORIGIN SYSTEMS
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 08:53:00 -
[252] - Quote
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Tharrn
Edited by: Tharrn on 14/09/2007 16:18:37
If it is a technical problem to completely deny docking - what about docking fees that get increasingly horrendous the lower the standing?
Edit: P.S. I wouldn't mind blowing up Freedom Extension Stations in the Empire if Concord and the Empire turned a blind eye :P
It's less a technical issue and more a gameplay/design one - what do we do about Amarr stations in Minmatar lowsec space, for example? Do we let Amarr FW players dock there? Do we stop Minmatar FW players docking there? What about the ones in hisec? What about Caldari stations in Minmatar space - do we let Amarr FW players dock there? And so on and so forth... It's something we're still considering including, but it's still not clear whether or not we can come up with a consistent, coherent way of restricting docking rights.
Factional warfare... they are destroyed :)
If you're gonna have a war, make it a big one that everyone will want to be in.
Yes, there should be massive NPC fleets from the Empires consisting of dreads, carriers, and large scale support -IN EMPIRE- conquering these enemy stations and making them their own. NPC "enemy" fleets flee the stations. Haulers undock trying to evacuate personnel and assets only to be destroyed without mercy. Those with horrendous standing will be charged, may not be able to rent corp offices, might not be able to use the fitting or repair shops.
It's WAR! It's not supposed to be sunshine and happiness.
THUKKER -Be Paranoid
 |
Solant
Minmatar
Ventis Secundis
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 13:33:00 -
[253] - Quote
Originally by: Malachon Draco
2. Meaningful choices.
Also if you want faction warfare, everyone aligned with Minmatar should be flying a Minmatar ship. Everyone aligned with Amarr should be flying an Amarr ship. Then you get real faction warfare. And choices should be practically permanent. Also no switching sides, no choosing the easy route.
It would IMO be the death of factional warfare if you'd see a fleet of CVA squaring off against Ushra'Khan with a third of the CVA in Megathrons, 15% in Rokhs and 15% in Tempests, vs a UK fleet in 30% megathrons, 20% rokhs and 10% apocalypses. Make the choices tough, and make people stick to them.
Abolutely no way this will ever work. Think about your suggestion for like.. 5-10 seconds.
I am Minmatar. I fly caldari ships exclusively. My corpmates want to fight with me. Some of them fly gallente. Some of them fly amarr. A couple fly minmatar.
Are you telling me I can't fly with my corp unless I force them all to somehow miraculously train for X_races ships in the next 3 months?
Back to the drawing board on that one.
|
Solant
Minmatar
Ventis Secundis
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 13:38:00 -
[254] - Quote
Originally by: Connor Banks
Edited by: Connor Banks on 27/09/2007 16:15:08
Here are some ideas how to utilize the existence of faction ships in future faction wars. Instead of focusing how to penalize the usage of twrongv ships, how about giving a small bonus for piloting the trightv ship? The bonus could for example be connected to both your liked by and disliked by faction standings. Also, the racial skills could come to affect the bonus.
Example:
A Caldari piloting a Navy Raven has a 5.0 faction standing with the Caldari state. The pilot also has a -5.0 standing with the Gallente.
The above example could give following bonus:
Both the liked by and the disliked by faction standing could be connected to the Caldari pilotFs ability to call in reinforcements under distress. The liked by standing could determine the magnitude of the reinforcement. That is, the more the Caldari state likes the Caldari pilot the more and better ships will be sent to the pilot in distress.
The disliked by standing could determine the time delay for the reinforcements to appear. This would mean that the more the Caldari pilot is disliked by the Gallente the faster the reinforcements will be deployed and arrive to the scene of action.
Further more, in this example the Caldari pilot also has some knowledge about Gallente ships. Given that the Caldari pilot has valuable information regarding how to operate Gallente ships the pilot could be given a small bonus when engaging Gallente. The bonus could then manifest itself via a small boost to both ECM and ECCM items towards/against Gallente ships.
End of example.
Thanks for your time!
Absolutely silly for the same reasons I listed above.
Can we step AWAY from turning this into some kind of defacto "fly the right races ships or DIE" concept? There is absolutely no way CCP is ever going to incorporate this.
They have stated youre going to have the option to choose whatever side you want, partly because corporations are not going to be willing to fight their own members simply based on racial ship types. Why would they start punishing players who weren't flying the "right" ships?
Besides, do you have any idea how unbalanced the concept of an all-gallente fleet vs an all amarr fleet would be? or an all caldari fleet against all minmatar?
Please people, lets use our brains before we just start throwing around baseless ideas... im not trying to be callous here but seriously, trying to force people into a racial ship role is a BAD idea simply because the game is open ended when it comes to racial choices.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar
|
Posted - 2007.09.28 14:12:00 -
[255] - Quote
Edited by: Ellaine TashMurkon on 28/09/2007 14:15:33
Racial fleets should be all about supply. Amarr FW players should have easy access to Amarr ships and faction stuff - as rewards and reimbusements. No enforcment though.
Example:
Adam and Barney are Amarr FW players. Adam uses Apoc, Barney uses Mega.
Adam will get Amarr mods and equipment up to Navy level, as FW rewards. One day he may get a Navy apoc too. He can use all this stuff directly, becoming independent from market like a solidier - all equiped by his country.
Barney gets the same stuff in his "FW shop". He can use armor and cap mods, but he has no use for tachyons and Navy Apoc, so he sells them and buys 425mm-s II. Its some effort to trade them, but in financial worth totals, he gets the same.
Adam looses his navy apoc with navy fittings in FW. Rather then get any ISK insuurance repayment, he spends some FW points and requests reimbusement. Amarr Navy gives him a brand new shiny ship with all destroyed fittings.
Barney looses his mega with some Amarr fittings and 425mm rails. He can keep this as a fully private loss and cover all expenses. He can also request reimbusement from Amarr Navy. They are able to give him some of the fittings, but they will probably have no Megathrons in stock and will only be able to offer money. Money based on base price. Taking in account mineral prices, loosing ship itself gives Barney some income - but it costed him FW points, so is not magic moneymaker in fact. He also gets reimbusement for destroyed fittings, but sadly, base prices are below market prices of most better equiupment. He will also not get a navy mega reimbused, ever, because Amarr navy does not have those for sure, and will not cover its 500 million value. Thats because its open market value, way above production cost (for navy, not for players). So if Barney looses Navy Mega, he gets only about 100m reimbusement.
 |
Connor Banks
|
Posted - 2007.09.29 10:54:00 -
[256] - Quote
As I have understood it, the whole point with faction wars is that you have to choose which side you want to fight for. If that is the case, then I assume that there will be some sort of loyalty hierarchy by which the faction you fight for perceives you. Furthermore, I also imagine this loyalty hierarchy would then dictate the rewards a pilot gets.
If there would be a loyalty hierarchy in faction wars, wouldnFt it be reasonable to assume that race and faction standings are the two most important parameters? Other parameters, or sub-parameters, could be faction ships. How exactly all the parameters would manifest themselves in the game is not my place to decide.
If race, faction standings, faction items, and other possible parameters are not included in faction wars, then I fail to see the purpose of the whole faction war idea. WouldnFt it then be much easier to simply change how the present kill rights system works, because that is what faction wars in the end will be all about!
|
Amika Ala'sa
Amarr
T.A.A.S.M. Manufacturing
|
Posted - 2007.09.30 06:34:00 -
[257] - Quote
Yay . . . we get to go to war now.
|
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
Glauxian Brothers
Ground Zeero
|
Posted - 2007.09.30 08:53:00 -
[258] - Quote
My few favorite personal thoughts:
1. Concord removed, instead we could have national or regional polices.
2. Faction warfare should be "everywhere" no silly pvp "arenas" or whatsoever.
3. Factional warfare and standings should be definetly linked. No sudden leaps from side to side. It should be long term goal to work for one faction. Where PvP would play the main role, so no switching sides in a week by killing rats in 0.0.
4. If you fight for one faction or kill members of one faction, you would be denied access to certain services like docking at stations in sovereignity of the named faction. I think this is pretty important. NPC reactions should make sense. You don't help enemy of yours.
5. I think low security space could cover a larger part of empire if factional warfare takes a place.
6. Player corporations would be of course affected by their individual players and their standings.
7. Since different players don't share same idea about the concept or RP. it shouldn've be required.
|
Twilight Dragon
Gallente
The Nine Gates
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.09.30 20:38:00 -
[259] - Quote
Okay, I like how this is going, my only concern if for the people who would prefer to not **** off the empires while doing this. Suggesting that you put in an option for people to run with serpentis, angels, sansha, guristas, and the other major pirate factions. Pretty sure you would have people that would do it, those nasty pirates ( especially if you have decent rewards ). And there will definitely be people willing to go out and shoot them.
Twilight Dragon
|
Proton Power
Amarr
Power Corrupts Tech
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.10.01 00:52:00 -
[260] - Quote
Okay, I have never been interested into the RP / Factions until reading some of this, and then reading other parts of this makes me not want any part to do with it again.
Anyway, I think the only low sec idea is a horrible idea, if people still have to go out looking for pvp and then having to deal with pirates, and this and that it will get to the point where its not worth it and nobody will end up doing it, you would be better off in 0.0 space.
I feel it should be like a switch. You can turn it on and off, but limited, you can't be part of the war one day and the next day not. Should take like 10 days or so to turn off the switch. Corps and Alliances should have the ability to due this as well. The switch basicly allows anyone in the opposing faction that has there switch on to become a target.
This would cause mass PVP in empire, which I think would be great for the game, RP's, and such. Then those that want no part don't have to partake. I feel it should be a 4 way fight not a 2 way fight, each faction should fight each other in some way, and you could give missions like go out and kill specific ships, or a number of people. Maybe even make it so you have to go collect x amount of corpses of the enemy faction.
I also feel you can fly any ship you want, but for missions to be a success you need to be in your race faction ships. Example if I just want to go kill people I can fly what ever, but if I want it to count for one of my ship kills for my mission, I would need to be in an Amarr ship if I chose amarr as my faction.
I also feel your character should be the faction you represent, not your standings. It would suck for a lot of us old timers, but it would be wierd to have an amarr character fighting for the minmatar IMO.
HOpe this makes sense and hope it gets read now that this has went 9 pages. I know if it happend somthing like this I would probably open up an RP corp myself.
Maybe make it where what ever faction has the most completed missions in the past 24hrs gets some sort of bonus, like 5% more shields, or damage or somthing.
-----------------------------------------------
http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=439797Cli |
|
GoGo Yubari
PAK
|
Posted - 2007.10.01 01:34:00 -
[261] - Quote
Wow, dynamic security status based on which territory you are at = absolute win. Note that this could be expanded out to player sovereignty, for a totally seamless fit!
Love by nature. Live by luck. Kill by profession. |
Raith Dag'gar
|
Posted - 2007.10.01 13:07:00 -
[262] - Quote
would be nice it would take ppl away form thinking to their alliances and corp wars ... would be nice to see an army of one factions npc enter a system and start a war... meaning that players of an opposing race will have to react and work together this anyhow with a news warning or so
would give eve a new aspect ... also maybe even a chance for new races to emerge
would like to see multi racial alliances like "BOB" or "the Goons" reacting to this would really make ppl rethink the way of playing eve ... ( this should affect corperations) also i think this should bring about large alliances being stand alone from the factions .... meaning the factions can also target the bigger alliances ... also making them rethink the idea of trade and currancy
also beginning players would feel more able to do something if they cant find a corp or get fed up with misssions
ranking players as a reward to fighting in the war would also be a nice addition to the game also distribution of faction ships would be a reward
love the idea
|
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
Abyss Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.02 16:55:00 -
[263] - Quote
Agent Assassination please...
That Duvolle barsteward Sitlar Beene has got it coming for never giving me a T2 Ship BPO.
I'd quite like to see NPC (& PC) stations destroyable too. Lets get rid of some clutter eh?
- Ideas are my business...maybe thats why I'm always skint!
Please read my ideas |
Ejderdisi
Caldari
Dirty Deeds Corp.
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.10.05 00:05:00 -
[264] - Quote
I think it should work like this:
U go to a caldari station. Go to Bounty office. Say that u want to fight for caldari. U get war declared to any other guy that accepts other factions privateer status.
U can hunt them in space no matter whose space it is. As arrogant factions trust their privateers. Means when u get bored u can pew pew even in jita.Or u can patrol the empire for an easy kill, whose also looking for an easy kill. And dropping faction fighter status should be as easy as getting in. This will remove station camps and prolonged and uneven fights.And so u'll do PvP when u want it, how u want it.
But this is all PvP. Game should track your kills against other faction fighters , not counting shuttles and noobships ofcourse. And giving a frig 1point a BS 5 point(values are just for example). Which 5 points value should be %10 of a BS's insurance money. So 2 buddy shouldnt kill each other full day to farm the game. So apart from loot u can have benefits from fighting for faction. Turn points to LP if u want.
Ofc , when ever u jump in Faction warfare u should have a new chat window with active fighters in constellation. which coulnt gank each other as normal NPC corp members.but can gang up for better and faster kills.
Also some good event can be organised that an arena. Example: As there will be a factional war in system XXX at 1600 eve-time. At astroid belt X , there will be a gallantean carrier which carries 3 faction modules. Go kill it and loot the can. Only factional fighters can engage or the concord will interfare as Yulai convention etc etc.
PvE is not required as we have already cosmos missions and maybe a few more cosmos missions only acquirable by accepting Faction fighter status might be seeded.
The penalty for fighting the enemy faction must be isk wise. If u want Gallante to forgive u because of your sins, u should give money to Gallante faction. It should be like a bounty on your head increasing with every mission u do against Gallante NPC. But Gallante Player kills shouldnt be problem for gallante federation. As all capsuleers are just somewhat mercs in great war :) And docking shouldnt be problem as far as u dont go -5 status to faction. Same rules with missions.
Maybe I should edit this someother time.. too late here 
|
Roy Gordon
Caldari
The Star Wolves
Aunni Ti Tsuun Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.10.05 15:24:00 -
[265] - Quote
I dont know if it has been covered yet, but one idea would be to have key systems in each empire which are designated as 'faction combat zones'. They would be a bit like gladatorial area's if you like. Ships of opposing factions will not have standing loss or incur Concord retribution if they attack each other in those systems. For example- System A is designated as a 'faction combat zone' as its a border system between the Caldari and Gallente. In this system Gallente players can fire on Caldari players without penalty and viz versa. Other race ships who fire on Caldari or Gallente ships in this area will suffer the usual consequences.
That which does not kill us makes us stronger.
The Universe is ruled by three basic principles-
Matter, Energy and Enlightened Self-Interest! |
Spoon Thumb
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.07 19:42:00 -
[266] - Quote
Edited by: Spoon Thumb on 07/10/2007 19:44:12
ok, so maybe I'm replying a little late, but hopefully still get seen for FW Mk. II
- Differentiate sub-factions / intra-faction corps. So have a second tier where you can align yourself to say "Khanid Navy" or "House Sarum" within the overall "Amarr" faction. Give Lai Dai leaning players slightly different objectives within the same mission (So "retrieve the Stolen Datacores as well and we'll pay you double!" . Also give different rewards based on sub-faction / faction-corp. E.g. Atm, Khanid Navy BCS is exactly the same stats as Caldari Navy one. Make one have say uber fittings and the other have better RoF but both do same dmg % bonus
- For those who have flagged themselves as being aligned to a faction, make them auto join the "Minmatar Special Ops" chat channel or whatever. Creates an "official" chat for coordinating stuff in a similar manner to alliance and corp chats, with players able to still go off and organise groups themselves in their own channels
Khaldari
In-game channel: khanidpublic |
Slvr Foxx
|
Posted - 2007.10.08 11:47:00 -
[267] - Quote
Faction warfare... now this sounds cool.
Here are my ideas on this subject.
* Specific factional corporations might have to be created for the purpurse of the warfare... For example "Caldari Navy Combat Wing" and "Gallante Navy Combat Wing" this will give them the freedom to attack any opposing faction who they are at war with, like war declaration, including empire space. (perhaps not in 1.0 - 0.9 space though to give a retreat location)
* The storyline dictated by the Game devs would govern who each faction is at war with, would be great to have an in depth storyline that involves players and NPC players.
* Upon entering the NPC factional war corp, they are given a Naval type rank. The more targets shot down, the higher the rank, probably relating to the amount of collateral damage they have caused. This will stop people from bunny hopping up ranks with alt popping.
* The higher the rank, the more prestige in the kill, demotion for too many failiures would be inevitable, but people with higher ranks could be mentioned in the storylines by the devs for further infamy.
* All gang related kills should be split equally in terms of glory and rank increase, not just the person who laid the final blow. Splitting the collateral damage toll means no one gets left behind in terms of promotion and rank increase.
* perhaps rewards and such given out in forms of medals and commendation such.
* Wars in empires could create alot of lag, so a new form interdiction device could be launched like a "War bubble", that can only be launched away from gates and stations that only draw in opposing war factions out of warp, leaving other players to go about buisness.
* Something could be done with the low sec aspect of things so factional capital ship warfare could happen, maybe strategical pos's that devs could place form time to time that only waring factions could siege, maybe a ded space or something that only the waring factions can warp and cyno too. The devs would corp mail as part of a storyline that if the siege is successful for either side, i/e defence OR attack, good rank increases and reward will be given. No penalty will be incurred for a loss.
* For higher ranking players, they might have authority over operations and how they are carried out, like alliance leaders and CEO's do now.
* Firing upon a civillian will mean concord and NPC navy's get involved, also a massive drop in status and rank. Continuing misconduct will reult in dishonerable discharge out of faction corp and unable to rejoin any faction war corp for a set amount of time.
* Ranks would be assessed mointhly, for example would backdate 30 days and work out how much damage in terms of isk has been dealt, like how killboards work.
Well, thats it for now.
Slvr Foxx
|
Aki Yamato
|
Posted - 2007.10.08 21:48:00 -
[268] - Quote
I haven't read whole 9 pages so I'm sorry if similar idea is already written down.
Ranking&reward system
IMO faction warfare should bring similar ranking system as WOW has. I'm sure that system is well known for most people here so I wont describe it. Important thing is that by killing opposite faction ships pilots and installations you get a rank.
Now reward part:
For each rank your faction will pay daily/weekly certain amount of equipment points (EP).
For these EP you can buy in special faction stores standard ships ammo modules ETC. (just like in real army).
Goal is to liberate PVP pilots from mindless rating, pointless mission running, simply all foking PVM.
BIG GUN
BIG FUTURE |
Justen Kase
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 21:44:00 -
[269] - Quote
Can't see see any need for any of this. Thank God it's optional and for me, non-existent. Would really like to CCP spend some time on something other than dreaming up more ways to do PvP. Put Pew Pew in low sec and 0.0, kick the gankers and ore thieves out of empire and all will be well.
I guess that's one for the "cons"...
|
Slvr Foxx
|
Posted - 2007.10.10 14:12:00 -
[270] - Quote
Originally by: Justen Kase
Can't see see any need for any of this. Thank God it's optional and for me, non-existent. Would really like to CCP spend some time on something other than dreaming up more ways to do PvP. Put Pew Pew in low sec and 0.0, kick the gankers and ore thieves out of empire and all will be well.
I guess that's one for the "cons"...
The reason for doing this as far as I can see is that people who are in a 0.0 corp and alliance like myself and many others, know that being in a corp or alliance in 0.0 isn't all about being up to shoot eachother in PVP, there ane many more aspects in 0.0 life other that shooting stuff such as diplomacy between other corps and alliances, logistics and mining on a major scale for either ice fuels for POS's or minerals to start station/capitla ship production. As soon as you get to 0.0 things become more political and territory related, especially part of a major alliance, but not always enters a conflict phase. So PVP is hit and miss at times, and mobilization of a major force for engaugment is a tactical nightmare.
So the devs are trying to set up a pick up your ship and go type of PVP that is accessable to everyone who does want to go PVP and doesn't want to get blasted by the empire - 0.0 blob bubble camp. So by setting up a designated "fight club navy" as it would seem to be, the only people that you can fight will be the opposing people who want to fight in enemy faction. The main part of PVP that upsets everyone is the people who want pew pew are not finding opposing people, but instead picking on every stray noob in low sec to satisfy thier blood lust. The irony of it is the noobs are also upset from thier loss of thier ship and wish the PVP'ers would attack other willing PVP'ers. The factional warfare idea is a good one, and needs alot of discussion, please everyone, let me know what you think of my pervious long post on my ideas list... Make any sense?
Slvr Foxx
|
|
| |
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 |