DUST Search - 10 suggestions for the new Faction Warfare

All Channels

General Discussions

10 suggestions for the new Faction Warfare

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1324	Posted - 2013.10.19 02:54:00 - [1] - Quote 1.) TEAM DEPLOY! 2.) CCP suggestion about tk's needs reworked. Some suggestions I have to mitigate them would be higher standing requirements to play in more important battles, essentially segregating lower, medium, and higher levels of standings so you play with people on or above (but NOT below) your level. In addition if they indeed implement a team deploy they need to provide a way to disable tk's kicking a person from the match, give that option to the teams deploying. Furthermost, allow a rating system accessed by looking at player info where people can rate a person in terms of stars or something. This would allow a person to look at his teams ratings upon entering the WB to decide if he doesn't want to play with these people. 3.) When a team loses a FW match, they can receive however paltry a sum of LP's for trying, but they should lose standings slightly for each loss. 4.) A voting system at the conclusion of each match allows for nomination of an MVP. Being voted MVP would provide extra LP rewards if a minimum number of votes are cast. 5.) CCP wants to put aurum variants up for exchange for LP points. I'm cool with that. However, either in addition, or in replacement, I suggest adding in Proto suits that either come with a marginal increase in cpu/pg or perhaps an extra slot. This would allow those that are satisfied with their suits exciting rewards to grind out for tourney's and PC's and such. These suits would be colored differently in addition, to signify their rarity. 6.) A board (similar to corp contracts from chrome) where dust bunnies can offer full teams for potential contracts that can be viewed eve side. This board would list isk price. Eve side they could then accept the team for a specific system of fighting they are consumed with winning, or counter the contract offer while listing the system they want to fight. On another note could they assign a specific corp via a contract that would presumably allow a certain corp during an accepted hour to be responsible for fights, in a sense mixing PC and FW? 7.) Any TK responsible for destroying a vehicle will have to replace the isk, even if it draws his char into the negative. 8.) Instead of replacing isk for LP, half isk payouts so people don't hemorrhage money so badly. 9.) Lower number of matches in order to achieve standings, but create a weekly bump system so people don't rest on their laurels. 10.) Someone mentioned medals. I'm going to copy their post and give them credit. Anyone that's got additional suggestions or disagrees with the proposed suggestions please make rational arguments.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1330	Posted - 2013.10.19 03:01:00 - [2] - Quote Asirius Medaius wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: 7.) Any TK responsible for destroying a vehicle will have to replace the isk, even if it draws his char into the negative. Out of all your points (most were good), this one made me smile the most. It could be extended if majority desired to include any tk at all. This would give players pause. And the only way you wouldn't have to pay it is if the person you TK'd declined it.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1336	Posted - 2013.10.19 03:22:00 - [3] - Quote Asirius Medaius wrote: Agreed. Moving on to another point you mentioned (about the isk being replaced by LP), I really think that the LP should be added on top of a regular isk payout, otherwise, people are going to camp and take minimal approaches to win since they won't want to lose too much money. I think CCP needs to chose one and stick to it, either: 1.) ISK payouts, and faction items cost ISK and LP... or... 2.) No ISK payouts, faction items only cost LP If they don't stick with one of these, people are going to see faction weapons as too much expensive/grind for something with such little benefit (since CCP said it's just going to have PG/CPU requirements reduced). Will losing all of these suits during FW matches where people are already using expensive Proto fits be worth a measly weapon with reduced PG/CPU requirements? I'm starting to think "not really", unless you are loaded on ISK, but not everyone is, and that can lead to a lot more outcry on the forums. I'm not positive. But I think the community would essentially kill pub skirmish matches if FW gave Loyalty Points and didn't reduce payouts for isk. That's why i'm in favor or reducing it, but not eliminating it. Make it so people bleed a little or a little more than pubs, but not so much they need to play 5 pub matches to afford 1 FW. FW will nerf the economy if people get behind it, but as Cubs and me were discussing this earlier tonight he made a good point about how the top 5% of players have 90% of the isk on dust. I don't want FW stagnating because people aren't willing to invest isk they don't have for a few suits/weaps/modules they don't need.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1338	Posted - 2013.10.19 03:38:00 - [4] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Half of your suggestions are not necessarily good for FW nor fitting with FW EVE side tenets and don't bull ** me saying "This is Dust not EVE" because these are the same people you are dealing with in both games. Elaborate why. And don't bull ** me saying stupid things preemptively about how you don't want to be bull shitted. Open minds please!
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1343	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:11:00 - [5] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Perhaps the listing side gets a little ISK but not much LP? The ISK is our advance for signing up for the battle, you get the LP for winning. If you got absolutely nothing for losing a lot of newer players would stay the hell away from FW. While you naturally don't want people fresh out of the academy in FW, new-ish players with a couple million SP should be encouraged to at least try it out. I agree. CCP has already proposed a slice of LP points , with the losers perhaps obtaining 1/5 of what the winners take away.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1343	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:13:00 - [6] - Quote KenKaniff69 wrote: As someone who runs vehicles, the entire concept of FW and reduced ISK or NO ISK all hinges on team deploy. I will not be playing FW if 4 LAV's run into my tank because blues are too stupid to drive straight or they walk onto my grenades or don't bail out of my dropship, etc....all things I cannot control THAT WILL HAPPEN. Everything I listed just adds to team killing which would put me on a cool down in 1-2 games. We need reduced ISK at the very least until we have a player market or all of the racial content. There isn't one race that has a complete set of vehicles or suits ATM so I still need to buy them with ISK. Did you miss my suggestion to mitigate this? It's in the OP. If you disagree provide a reason why.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1343	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:14:00 - [7] - Quote Forlorn Destrier wrote: Love how you completely ignored the part where CCP asked you to add these ideas to the existing threads - you know, the ones they are reading. good ideas by the way. Indeed. I prefer to create my own thread and then post links to them in the threads, cause otherwise you just get buried. Plus now I get reminders that let me know when someone responds. I'm tired of saving links and then trolling through pages attempting to see if someone noticed my post.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1343	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:16:00 - [8] - Quote 8213 wrote: I would like to see FW have its own League System. Separate out the bad players, medium, and high... I don't know what it is about FW, but it seems the absolute WORST players in the game play there. This is why I suggest me indeed separate players based on standings and ratings given by peers and perhaps even (if you wanted to flesh it out) eve ratings for dust corps that have completed contracts for them.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1343	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:17:00 - [9] - Quote Beck Weathers wrote: "4.) A voting system at the conclusion of each match allows for nomination of an MVP. Being voted MVP would provide extra LP rewards if a minimum number of votes are cast." No thank you, No matter how good someone dose to win the fight above everyone else, if hes not in the biggest squad of people on the team he will never be given enough votes above the bigger squad voting for their fav person. it will just lead to plain favoritisim not actual MVPs getting the rewards. Can it be improved, or simply scrapped? I think at the least it would be viable in full team deployments. And if they tracked how many mvp's you got only from Team Deploy it would be relevant. I'll have to think of a counterargument because this is a good example of a refutation that makes sense. Thanks for sharing
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1344	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:31:00 - [10] - Quote Beck Weathers wrote: How about just add it to PC? there you at least should know everyone. FW while not pub matches are still fairly public. Ill think more on its aswell, but till you can get entire team deploys it would be to easy to exploit. I would hazard that if only one squad was present but a non squad member earned that MVP tittle It wouldn't be hard for the other players not in the squad to contribute and give him mvp. But i recognize the point. I see exploitation as well.

Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1344	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:33:00 - [11] - Quote KenKaniff69 wrote: It looks like they didn't think of what I just mentioned at all. Hopefully they will adopt a better system. Who knows? I feel like there may be a better TK protocol out there, but I haven't seen anything quite right yet. I think team kill wouldn't even matter if team deploy was allowed. Don't play bad cop Zatara. It seems like you guys are trying to fill your quotas for the month. What? I suggest in the OP that any vehicles tk'd must be paid for by the tk'er, even if it sends his back account negative. How is this not sufficient?
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1346	Posted - 2013.10.19 04:50:00 - [12] - Quote KenKaniff69 wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: KenKaniff69 wrote: It looks like they didn't think of what I just mentioned at all. Hopefully they will adopt a better system. Who knows? I feel like there may be a better TK protocol out there, but I haven't seen anything quite right yet. I think team kill wouldn't even matter if team deploy was allowed. Don't play bad cop Zatara. It seems like you guys are trying to fill your quotas for the month. What? I suggest in the OP that any vehicles tk'd must be paid for by the tk'er, even if it sends his back account negative. How is this not sufficient? Doesn't matter. What happens if you weaken me to half health and then I die? Technically, you didn't kill me. Do you know how many hitbox and small turret-hull issues there are? If they don't fix the code for that, blue berries will be weakening tanks all the time because they don't know any better. We can survive it, but just barely. There's no good answer for this regardless. Doesn't mean that my idea wouldn't mitigate the vast majority. only forge shots and other vehicles have the potential to TK vehicles as opposed to av grenades and swarms as well.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1346	Posted - 2013.10.19 05:34:00 - [13] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: 1.) TEAM DEPLOY! 2.) CCP suggestion about tk's needs reworked. Some suggestions I have to mitigate them would be higher standing requirements to play in more important battles, essentially segregating lower, medium, and higher levels of standings so you play with people on or above (but NOT below) your level. In addition if they indeed implement a team deploy they need to provide a way to disable tk's kicking a person from the match, give that option to the teams deploying. Furthermost, allow a rating system accessed by looking at player info where people can rate a person in terms of stars or something. This would allow a person to look at his teams ratings upon entering the WB to decide if he doesn't want to play with these people. 3.) When a team loses a FW match, they can receive however paltry a sum of LP's for trying, but they should lose standings slightly for each loss. 4.) A voting system at the conclusion of each match allows for nomination of an MVP. Being voted MVP would provide extra LP rewards if a minimum number of votes are cast. 5.) CCP wants to put aurum variants up for exchange for LP points. I'm cool with that. However, either in addition, or in replacement, I suggest adding in Proto suits that either come with a marginal increase in cpu/pg or perhaps an extra slot. This would allow those that are satisfied with their suits exciting rewards to grind out for tourney's and PC's and such. These suits would be colored differently in addition, to signify their rarity. 6.) A board (similar to corp contracts from chrome) where dust bunnies can offer full teams for potential contracts that can be viewed eve side. This board would list isk price. Eve side they could then accept the team for a specific system of fighting they are consumed with winning, or counter the contract offer while listing the system they want to fight. On another note could they assign a specific corp via a contract that would presumably allow a certain corp during an accepted hour to be responsible for fights, in a sense mixing PC and FW? 7.) Any TK responsible for destroying a vehicle will have to replace the isk, even if it draws his char into the negative. 8.) Instead of replacing isk for LP, half isk payouts so people don't hemorrhage money so badly. 9.) Lower number of matches in order to achieve standings, but create a weekly bump system so people don't rest on their laurels. Anyone that's got additional suggestions or disagrees with the proposed suggestions please make rational arguments. 1. On backlog last I checked with Team True Grit. 2. I see this being abused to the 7th level of hell, with enough alts or hive like mentality of goonswarm you can literally kick everyone out of FW. 3. Faction charges you a bill equal to the potential loyalty points in cost of clones, biomass, equipment, CCC, and one MCC. 4. Also abusable to the 7th level of hell. 5. Well anythings possible on this one. 6. Sounds a bit inelegant, maybe something more streamlined contract system. 7. Once again abusable to hell, if you want to be paid for you loss you need to do it through social means. 8. FW is supposed to be an isk drain and isk mover and item faucet. The economy is doing pretty terrible without a reliable sink. 9. I am going to say no to this. Players don't like it when you take things away from them just because they didn't show up, this has been proven over and over again. Why even world of warcraft experimented with this once and in order to fix the mass protest on that subject was basically 180 the language. 10. I rather see a rank system with added perks, can only get one ranks, you can be a good diplomat still. After all we're still mercenary and sell swords and most of the militia commands are not going to care either way as you dying and killing each other still lowers the number of people they rather not deal with later. 1.) Fantastic 2.) Potentially. I didn't say a persons rating would allow them to be kicked, I suggested I might leave. If goons want to troll people's rating into the ground then so be it. It's their sandbox too. 3.) Wait, I must have missed this somewhere. Is this a suggestion of your own? Can you elaborate on this? 4.) Potentially. Discussed elsewhere about being more viable in team deploy. More of a concept applicable in a broader context for organized matches than a specific suggestion of necessity for FW. 5.) 6.) Elelegant? perhaps. Got any refinements to suggest? Essentially I want some way of opening a tab that allows me to view contracts posted that I can battle. 7.) Why? Why would you tk if you know the guy gets the isk back anyway? Seems like a potential deterrent. 8.) The economy is actually working pretty well for 90% of dust as an isk sink. It isn't working for the 10% that are vets that have been riding isk since they refunded salvage, or make money from PC passively. 9.) I see your point. Perhaps This is not worth implementing. 10.) I'd actually prefer to see him refute this. But the point of me quoting it was that I agree with both of you. Perks, medals, w/e.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1347	Posted - 2013.10.19 05:50:00 - [14] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Re:7 ) Legalized theft. The tank and where I bought it was cheaper than what you are going to pay me in damages. Open market yo. Better not TK then huh?
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1347	Posted - 2013.10.19 09:11:00 - [15] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Re:7 ) Legalized theft. The tank and where I bought it was cheaper than what you are going to pay me in damages. Open market yo. Better not TK then huh? Let me remind of you of the Teir 3 battleship exploit. There was a man actually two in eve that done found out that by insuring a certain type of ship, then self destructing the said ship netting more money than what other players where selling it for. This man nearly destroyed 10,000 battleships in this manner and made it quite rich and since it was not deemed an exploit he didn't lose a single isk though it did eventually prompt changes to the insurance system to be a bit more dynamic, it just further proves that the people of New Eden are crazy. Also as it stands now I am sure there is a sure fire way to get killed in a tank by a friendly involving collision mechanics. In which the victim will be registered as the suicider (if he did not survive) and the tker would get blamed for the death. The other troll method involves dropships. So compensate him for half the isk lost? I mean...no one in dust will be buying tanks for extremely low prices except the odd guy that gets one from salvage Even once player markets come and you CAN incite the problem we're speculating...how many tanks selling for below market value won't get bought? Point being that it's not like Eve where you build ****. It all just costs. And I don't know of any plans to implement an insurance program here on dust.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1347	Posted - 2013.10.19 10:17:00 - [16] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Zatara Rought wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Re:7 ) Legalized theft. The tank and where I bought it was cheaper than what you are going to pay me in damages. Open market yo. Better not TK then huh? Let me remind of you of the Teir 3 battleship exploit. There was a man actually two in eve that done found out that by insuring a certain type of ship, then self destructing the said ship netting more money than what other players where selling it for. This man nearly destroyed 10,000 battleships in this manner and made it quite rich and since it was not deemed an exploit he didn't lose a single isk though it did eventually prompt changes to the insurance system to be a bit more dynamic, it just further proves that the people of New Eden are crazy. Also as it stands now I am sure there is a sure fire way to get killed in a tank by a friendly involving collision mechanics. In which the victim will be registered as the suicider (if he did not survive) and the tker would get blamed for the death. The other troll method involves dropships. So compensate him for half the isk lost? I mean...no one in dust will be buying tanks for extremely low prices except the odd guy that gets one from salvage and sells it off. Even once player markets come and you CAN incite the problem we're speculating...how many tanks selling for below market value won't get bought? Point being that it's not like Eve where you build ****. It all just costs. And I don't know of any plans to implement an insurance program here on dust. But isn't that what your system is? insurance against friendly damage? Don't ever design around the hope of non exploitation when there is an opportunity for exploitation. \ Damn. I see your point. 1/2 isk payout prevents it while compensating the player somewhat though. I see no refutation. You're still offsetting the cost.
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1350	Posted - 2013.10.19 20:13:00 - [17] - Quote Karl Koekwaus wrote: Some of the things you mentioned aren't possible other are somewhat nice. 1.) Can be done, should be done. But only place full teams against other full teams. Would make for dedicated FW corps to be able to 'train' for PC or something. 2.) How can one play with people above their level, but not below their level. If one plays with someone above their level, the higher person is playing with someone below his level. So this is not really possible?. A rating system will be abused like mad. Just tell your alliance to keep voting down someone or another corp and watch their rating plummet due to 1000's of votes. 3.) So in the end you can't build standings with factions that lose the majority of their battles (aka minmatar)? This also can be abused like mad. create griefing alt, join battles with full squads, afk and make the enemy lose, diminishing their standings. if the standings on the alt are too low to join battles, recycle alts and start over. 4.) that's not gonna be abused in the slightest. 5.) If it's in the LP store it isn't gonna be rare for long and will be used for even worse pub stomping than we've seen till now. Faction suits would be nice though, but difficult to balance and can lead to powercreep if not done correctly (like making them just a tad better than Proto suits). 6.) Could be nice, but wouldn't it do the same as the team deploy feature? What is EVE FW players don't care and let your teams wait for hours? 7.) People wanting to grief care about ISK now? the only ones hurt are legit players making a mistake. Also is to easy to abuse the crap out off. 8.) CCP already said why they went this way. Some money would be nice, im interested to see how much gear is 25% of the stuff lost first though, and the time it will take them to get a working market up and running. 9.) Let's see how this pans out first. I think it's boring to max out in just a couple of weeks playing. 10.) You already get paid in LP and better LP the more loyal you are, this is makes this idea redundant. also; if they want to give you more, they can add this to the LP system and Store. or like they do in EVE with dropping tags which then are used to buy gear together with ISK and LP. 2.) Implement it same way as the academy. Higher level players can join a squad leader who's lower level, but a lower level player wouldn't be permitted to go into the higher tier matches. I worded it insufficiently. xD Rating system would be part of the sandbox just like people can grief in eve. It wouldn't kick you, but if you could see who rated you'd be able to identify relevant opinions. Does it matter what a players overall rating is if your corp all gave him 4+ stars? 3.) Can't affect tiers of levels higher than your own, which if contracts by Eve side are implemented would hopefully be a majority xD. Even stand alone they would only be able to grief the lower tiers, which I think griefing should be a potential tactic. 5.) Power creep if they were as easy to obtain as proto suits...which I wouldn't envision them being. They's be slightly better, but difficult to obtain many without investing lots of time. 6.) If there's no contracts offered you go and play regular contracts that are open to full teams. 7.)
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1352	Posted - 2013.10.19 20:38:00 - [18] - Quote Takahiro Kashuken wrote: 1.) Yes 2.) No, FF is going to crete all kinds of retards and ****** up situations, how will rating solve it? 3.) No that doesnt happen in EVE, you lose standing when you TK a friendly in EVE 4.) No, enough ppl from the same corp can just vote rig MVP, instead do either the top 3 for kills/WP/obj hacks/revives etc and have them rotate so its always a diff requirement to get MVP 5.) I would only say yes if faction vehicles get the same treatment 6.) Maybe, needs to be ironed out tho 7.) Cant be done, whats to stop someone crashing a LAV into a tank repeatedly just to grief and force the tank pilot to keep payout out ISK for something he has no control over 8.) No, LP is generally worth more than ISK, then again take from EVE when you run missions for the militias you get paid in ISK and LP but this is only against NPC and not players, maybe do this for FW NPC missions 9.) High number = loyalty, this is so griefers cannot swap to each faction and keep high standings with other factions 10.) I would only say yes if we can get vehicles also as prizes 2.) Rating it provides a way for your corp or friends to rate him, which would be relevant for you to make an assessment from. 3.) Dust is Dust. It's ok if we consider and idea that isn't in Eve. 4.) I'm open to your suggestion. It would be great for team deploy. 5.) Vehicles later on 6.) 7.) Why can't the system recognize the person who rammed who? Any suggestions for refinement? Do you see any way for a tank to be compensated for losing tanks to ff? 8.)
Zatara Rought MoIden Heath PoIice Department EoN. 1356	Posted - 2013.10.20 06:28:00 - [19] - Quote Bump