|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 01:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone! This is your fellow Dust University lecture host and your favorite no-life forum warrior here and I am wanting to share an idea I came up with in regards to how expand faction warfare to make it more meaningful and less random.
YesterdayGÇÖs Faction Warfare Back when faction warfare was introduced, battles use to be generated whenever a corporation selected a specific district within a faction system to attack. This was kind of similar to planetary conquest in terms of battles generated.
TodayGÇÖs Faction Warfare Today, battles are no longer generated like that. According to CCP Foxfour who made a post about it back in May 2013, faction battles are now dynamically generated by the Tranquility live server for players to join. In his own words GÇ£where these battles take place will be based on where complex are being completed in Eve FWGÇ¥. Eve Online players run various complex in space across various faction-warfare-specific systems. The more complex are completed in a particular system, the more battles are generated in that system for Dust 514 players. Eve players have access to certain information that allows them to monitor where complex are being completed so they can have an idea on where the next Dust-side faction battle will be.
Once a battle has been generated, Dust players can get in touch with an Eve player in various channels such as Chosen Matari, Lucent Echelon, State Task Force, and PIE Ground Control to see if they can fly over to the planet where the battle is taking place, link up with the node orbiting over the district, and then provide orbital bombardment support for the faction they are fighting for.
Currently, Eve Online players have to enlist in a faction in order for this system to work for them. In the meantime, Dust 514 players do not need to enlist in any faction but are at least encouraged to choose a side.
As Dust players gain control of more districts in a given star system for their respective faction, the easier it is for Eve-side players to be able to defend the system if they own it or put the system into a contested state if they are attacking it.
Source: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=739305#post739305
TodayGÇÖs Issues The problem with this current system is that it places too much dependency on Eve players and almost no control on the part of Dust players on where the next battle will take place. Even then, Eve players are still having to depend largely on Dust players to tell them where the next battle is taking place. This creates a design paradox. Dust players depend on Eve players to dynamically generate battles on the planets, but the Eve players depend on the Dust players to tell them where to go. If running enough complex in a certain system in Eve generates the battle there, shouldnGÇÖt that mean that Eve players would have to know by now where the next battle will take place? Clearly this is not working by the fact that in all channels the Eve players are the ones asking Dust players for directions. This is telling me that there is no guarantee that running and completing a lot of complex in a single system by an Eve player will generate a battle there. On top of that, there does not appear to be that many Eve players ready to fly through 10 systems to get to their destinations to deliver just one orbital bombardment. Overall, no one feels that one side has much control over where the battles are being generated.
There is also one additional problem that running complex does not address. There are players in Eve who only devote themselves to farming complex in space but these locations for farming are not in systems where the actual battles take place. So even if running plex in a given system does create battles for that system, it creates a new problem in which battles are generated in systems that are not critical to the faction in question.
Fixing The Issues So how do we fix these issues? How do we make it so that there is at least a guarantee that the faction battle will be dynamically generated in a particular system as a result of player actions? How do we make sure that battles in Dust are generated in systems where the battles actually take place? How do we make it easier for Eve players to participate in providing orbital bombardments for Dust-side players? But most importantly, how do we fix this is a way that makes it relatively easy to be implemented into Dust without having to make too many changes to Eve?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 01:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Solutions I was talking to UnclS2 from Lucent Echelon about this problem and he came up with the idea of using the API system to determine where the next battle will take place based on the losses inflicted on a given faction in Eve. Since it is based on losses by a given faction for a given system, the battle will be generated in the system where the most ships belonging to a faction have been lost recently because such losses are an indication that the system in question might actually be important to the faction and that means Dust players will have a more meaningful impact on Eve Online as they fight for control of the districts in those star systems.
Another solution that came up is something that returns control of faction battle generation to the Dust players by taking advantage of the Command Point system proposed up by CCP Rattati and his Think Tank.
Planetary Conquest 2.0 https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=203526&find=unread
In addition to Command Points being spent on corporate actions such as selling or moving clones, attacking districts, changing surface infrastructure, and adjusting reinforcement timers, these Command Points could theoretically be spent on star systems targeted by players in Dust. At the end of every downtime the server tallies up the number of CP devoted to each star system per constellation. The system with the most CP in that given constellation will have matches generated in one of its districts for the duration of that day. If a constellation does not have any CP spent on it, the battle will be generated based on UnclS2GÇÖs idea of battle generation. If two or more systems in a given constellation has equal number of CP spent on each of them, the system with the most RECENT CP spent on it will get the matches for the remainder of the day until downtime.
Either one of these two solutions could work as they will allow players on either side to make a more meaningful impact either on Dust or Eve Online. On the Eve side, players can dictate more effectively where the next Dust battle will occur by simply destroying more of the ships belonging to their opponents. Eve players also have access to data on their star map telling them which systems have seen the most ship destruction in the last 24 hours which will then give them a greater idea on where the next Dust battle will occur before it starts. On the Dust side, players can dictate where the Dust battle will occur by simply having their corporation spend Command Points on that system. This will encourage Dust corporations to get more in touch with their Eve-side partners in order to gather more intel on which systems are deemed critical to them to attack.
One additional benefit to either one of these solutions is that it will allow both Dust players and Eve players to feel more like they are really making a big impact in the game as a whole because the battles in both Eve and Dust would be taking place in more and more critical faction systems where Eve faction players are more likely to be at.
Ease of Implementation? As for implementing either one of these solutions, IGÇÖm not sure how complicated it would be to accomplish such a task, but IGÇÖm sure CCP could figure it out somehow. One solution takes advantage of the current API system while the other solution takes advantage of the Command Point system proposed by Rattati and his Think Tank. It is just a matter of which solution is more convenient.
Negative Impact? The only downside to this is that completing complex in space will no longer dynamically generate battles in Dust. Not that it mattered anyways considering the farmers in Eve Online causing problems with battles being generated in systems that donGÇÖt have any strategic importance and we already have Eve players coordinating with Dust players in various faction channels.
What do you think? Discuss.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 02:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:After being reminded how special contracts were selected I came to firmly believe that FW should just generate X amount of contracts at a time and display them in the same manner after you select your factions. These contracts would still be generated based on Eve interaction as they are now but Dust players would be able to actively select which of these to go into.
There would always have to be 2 contracts available with zero people in them so that 16 man teams can enter those.
Players who have selected a battle would wait in the warbarge until a 14 people have been queued on the opposite side.
This would seriously help with the whole blueberries being able to pick all 4 issue which makes me want to puke every time I think about it.
This would give the possibility of left behind squad members being able to join back in with their squad.
Battles should disappear once either MCC has lost its shields.
The only flaw I can see is that AWOXing becomes a real possibility by locking out battles in a losing manner for opposing teams and then leaving battle. This would be prevented by causing faction standings loss after leaving X amount of battles. Players who go negative in faction standings would be locked out for 24 hours just like if they had been booted for team killing.
There are still some minor details for this system that need to be worked out but I really think it is the ground work for keeping things stable in Eve like that team wants it while still giving the ability for Eve and Dust players to work with a bit more unity.
The problem with your idea is that it still depends largely on the current system of FW which is vastly flawed as I described it. Sure your idea would allow me to pick battles through the Special Contracts, but those contracts will likely take me to systems that don't have any strategic value to the faction in question because farming complex in Eve usually happens in a system that is out of the way from any major conflicts.
It's a nice idea you gave and I would love to see the Special Contracts finally have some use for once outside of CCP-sponsored events, but it still doesn't address the issues.
PS: I just tweeted this thread to CCP Rattati and CCP Foxfour. I like to know what their thoughts are on this.
https://twitter.com/Henry_Haphorn/status/607729601117360131
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.08 14:50:00 -
[4] - Quote
Bump
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.09 23:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:On the Eve side, players can dictate more effectively where the next Dust battle will occur by simply destroying more of the ships belonging to their opponents No,no, no Sir. That's not a good idea. This is half-measure solution and if it would be already in game players would exploit it by joining opposite faction with they alt just to eject from noobship somewhere in space and destroy it right after with they main character, to have impact on system ship-killed statistics - if you are talking about players ships here, because that what we can see in DUST at the end of FW match is lie, it's purely NPC ships. Majority of EVE players did not join FW for PvE, but for PvP(and small warfare gangs), and I think that should be a target here - creating mechanics that would work with EVE pilot PvP routine. I would agree that PvE actions are way in order to 'take' control over starsystem, by capturing NPC complexe's but they are impossible without PvP players that secure area. Beside decent FW pilot do not care much about taking those complex's in system if he is not forced by his CEO/Alliance Leader to do so. Making mission's for FW agents are way much more valuable for FW players. From my experience as EVE player and Dust player as well, I think that decision on which system Dust players are fighting should be completely depended on EVE players actions in form of anchoring some-kind of structures in system. - The first solid footstep that pilots need to do in order to start massive attack on system is anchoring and on-lining they own POS in one of moons with have some tactical meaning for them(for example it's the closes one to the stargate that lead to they home system, or it is between stations etc.). Player Owned Structures is safes way of hiding from PvP actions for pilots, and it's allowing them to support they activity in system with important tools like hangar for they corporation ships, or other items - with that they do not have to go 20 jumps back to home to change fleet proprieties they can do it instantly in area of operation without risking of being shoot-down on one of many camp-gates. So I think they should be able to anchor some kind of structure in they POS that is Merc docking station, allowing them to enter system and launching invasion on selected planet, may by the closes one to POS. - Defenders should already have that structure in they assets as default. Both sides should be able to support Dusters with destructible structure that gives them more clones in battle.
Sounds overly complicated to me. But I think I see where you're going with this and I like it. Let's take a look at system upgrades as an example here.
http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Factional_Warfare#System_upgrades_and_warzone_tier
Faction battles in Dust could be dynamically generated based on the tier of the star system as described. The higher the tier, the more likely battles get generated there.
I would probably go as far as combine this idea with the concept of letting faction corporations in Dust spent Command Points on systems that have upgrades on them so they can also influence the direction of battles. What do you think?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.10 20:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote:Imagine that you just started playing EVE, and you instantly know that FW is your 'thing', so you pack up your stuff and fly with them to some lonely system at edge of Minmatar FW low-sec, there is a station you can use, and some planets 2 or 4, 3 moons. So you starting your own corporation, and because you are born leader, youre corporation very fast grow in numbers. You starting with your own academy, to train new players and thanks to that your corporation is starting to be recognize by neighbors because of efficient killboard, some awesomely good pvp'layers are joining your group. So you starting to fill a bit squish in your system, and at the same point you do not want to separate your people acros two systems, so you are starting to looking at alternative way of generating ISK like planetary productions, moon reaction etc. sooner or later everything that is in your system have your corporation logo, and gives you profit. Beside that system is now camped 23/7 by 3 different time zone fleet, and you feel very safe to invest those thousands of LP to upgrade it to level 5, now one can take it because as soon he open new complex he instantly get send back to his own system.. ..and suddenly your system is being contested by some Merc, 16 randomly selected defenders were not able to find exit from their MCC unfortunately , and they loose battle(but they were paid for trying). Do you asking yourself how did those Merc find a way in to your system? I bet you do, it's pure magic they just appear from nowhere - that's wrong.
It would not be magic at all. In fact, Eve Online can help with that explanation of mercs infiltrating a planet. In Eve Online, I often found myself sneaking through low-sec systems that happen to be faction systems either in a cloaky hauler or in a stealth bomber. Considering that a frigate-sized ship can carry 16 mercs due to their size, those mercs can be dropped off with those ships. But what merc needs a frigate, if he already has a personal warbarge that somehow manages to quietly cyno jump into any system?
Besides, the point of this discussion is not about ruining the home systems of faction corps. The focus is primarily on dynamically generating Dust-side faction battles at the systems that are seeing the most action. The logic here is that if a faction system is experiencing high levels of activity, it is likely that the system is important and thus Dust-side faction battles should be generated there so that Dust-side loyalists can more directly help their faction advance or recover.
Perhaps my idea of tying it to tiers may not have been a good idea, BUT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING about it. And it should be done in a way that is relatively easy to implement and does not require too many changes to both Eve and Dust. Something that can be implemented in the short term.
I looked into your idea of structures once again, and I was reminded about the difficulties of managing structures in low-sec space because they are constantly being attacked. If you want to tie in the POS with Dust-side battle generation, the Eve player would expect good returns from their investment.
But before we do that, we have to first learn our lesson from PC. It was said that owning enough PC Districts in low-sec would give a bonus to the POSes orbiting the moons of the planets the Districts are on. But the bonuses were not worth the troubles that low-sec dwellers in Eve have to put up with on a daily basis.
As an alternative, I was thinking, how about we tie in the Customs Office instead? What can you figure out from that?
Or what about tying in faction battles to the PI colonies in a faction system? What can you think of with that?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.10 20:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:Being able to select from a list of active areas allows you to pick a system of strategic importance just like you are referring to while also maintaining stability on the link between the two games. I think what you may be over looking on deeper strategy in my idea is the fact that any corporation that operates on both sides would be able to easily form a small fleet and make sure that a system shows up on that list so that their allies on the ground are able to enter there. This would seriously take Q syncs to the next level and bring a depth to the connection between the two games that is almost beyond measure.
That might work.
Quote: The current system actually works far better than you may think but explaining that would require explaining every nuance to FW in Eve.
If you are correct, I would like to know more about Eve-side FW. But for the sake of Dust players here who never played Eve, is there a way you can make a TL;DR or a graph about it?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.10 22:51:00 -
[8] - Quote
deezy dabest wrote:@ Maken Tosch I would love to hop on comms and discuss further when you have time. I think we could meet some middle ground between our perspectives and come up with a really nice well thought out presentation to turn over to CCP.
What are your main game times? I can try to hop on at the time that is most convenient for you.
EDIT:
I have created an Eve moderated channel for further discussion by all other FW channel leaders and anyone that is interested in this project. I will be saving and formatting my chat logs for record keeping (obviously only when one of my characters is in the channel) as well as holding a couple of scheduled think tanks that will be recorded.
I will also be creating a trello board for this to post the chat logs, and recordings so that we can really evaluate every angle and present CCP with the best possible solution.
The channel name is
DFW initiative
Thanks for getting this started. Every little bit of extra dialogue helps.
Looking back at what UnclS2 told me in Lucent Echelon, I realized that the idea of tying ship losses in a system to Dust Faction battle generation could be adjusted to count ONLY ship losses that are the result of being destroyed by an opposing faction pilot. If you are enlisted Minmatar faction and you lost your ship to that of an Amarr faction pilot, that would count. However, if you lost the ship to a neutral player, it won't count. If you try to destroy the ship yourself, it won't count. You have to get someone from the Amarr side to destroy your ship. The Eve API should be able to track that kind of thing.
What do you think? Does that at least mitigate the chances of being exploited?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 01:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
UPDATE
I was just having a conversation with Deezy Dabest in the DFW Initiative channel and I decided that we should hold an open forum lecture on the matter where everyone can discuss on the current issues facing faction warfare and the possible solutions for it. I will be compiling notes to get us started and then the rest we can work from there to come up with a practical solution that can be implemented in a short time without giving CCP too much trouble over it.
Open Forum Lecture - How to Fix FW [Date:] Saturday June 13 [Time:] 1900 Eve Time [Channel:] Lecture.D-UNI
Eve Online pilots who provide OB support are especially welcome to join in on the discussion. Folks from Lucent Echelon, PIE Ground Control, State Task Force, and Chosen Matari are also welcome to join in to help come up with a solution.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.11 01:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:That........ is an awkward time.
Any time seems like an awkward time for someone in some timezone.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.12 22:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nice reminder to everyone that the Open Forum Lecture will start tomorrow at 1900 Eve Time in the Lecture.D-UNI channel.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 20:53:00 -
[12] - Quote
OK everyone!
The open forum has finally finished and MAN everyone had something to say for about 1 hour and 30 minutes which was longer than I had expected it to last. Unfortunately, due to the recent issue regarding voice comms going crazy in various channels, not only did the open forum had to be moved from the usual Lecture.D-UNI channel to the already-established Learning Coalition channel but also we were not able to record the audio of the conversation that we had. So the least I could do was jot down some notes on what people brought up in the open forum.
There were a lot of players in attendance including some new players who are interested in FW, but the notable ones are as follows:
Kain Spero deezy 1dabest - (eve character) Kaze Eyrou Middas Otomeya - (eve character) Thor Odinson42 Vash Warren Logistics-chan
I first went through a brief lecture describing the current mechanics of FW between Eve and Dust so that players can be on the same page. Later on, the issues were brought up and discussed immediately afterwards once the open forum part of the lecture got started.
Ideas and Questions Brought Up:
Make faction district battles visible in a queue list rather then be unknown until deployment? Use Entosis Links that are being implemented in Eve Online? Tie Eve kills and LP donated in last 12 hrs to Eve-side iHubs and complex running to battle generation? Adjust Warbarge/Orbital Bombardment notifications to better differentiate them from each other. OB Timer glitch needs to be addressed Eve-side; apparently Eve players have problems with this. Trade LP items in Dust? Could Faction Standings be used as a barrier to entry to LP items? [PS3 had to be reset at this point due to voice comm issues] Managed to log back in Players agree that FW rewards are improving. Make EOM stats more useful to Dust players as current EOM stats for FW seem mostly useless to Dust players. Lockout individual FW districts for X amount of time when they get completed? No sense of control currently in either Eve or Dust regarding where battles are generated. Tips from veterans to new players. Final words were had.
This is just a general TL;DR of what went on in the discussion. I like to thank all the players who attended the open forum for taking the time to speak out their minds. I was generally quiet on purpose so that everyone can make themselves heard while making sure that the open forum was properly moderated.
Overall, it turned out better than I thought despite the major setback we suffered today in comms.
Cheers,
Maken Tosch Twitter: @Henry_Haphorn
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
@Scheneighnay McBob
I like that. But the question is how would you have that be implemented in a way that is both easy for CCP to do and at least mitigate possible exploits?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.13 21:16:00 -
[14] - Quote
Nocturnal Soul wrote:I enjoyed the talk while playing FW its was really good and informed me more about the serious problems of FW
It's good to know that these lectures are helping people get informed.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:07:00 -
[15] - Quote
Luther Mandrix wrote:How about the HERO Bonus .The FW Player that has the most X (whatever CCP desides) if players fight around Him/Her they get increased LP Bonus in the match.The HERO would be fighting so to get the bonus Blues would have to fight near him also.
What if the HERO got the LP Reward as a Win so Blues would be fighting to get the Status in the match even if they are losing.
I would advise to be cautious with this idea. I do see the potential it has to encourage players to stay as a group and work together, but at the same time there has to be limits imposed on where this can be allowed to be effective. We would not want anyone to be gaming this mechanic in the redline.
If the limit is to make the HERO feature enabled outside of the redline, you would need CCP to implement a change in the UI to include where exactly does YOUR OWN redline end. As of right now we can only see where the redline ends for the enemy but not our own. We can make a guess right now on where our own redline would be, but that is prone to human error where you thought you were outside the redline but later found out your were a few meters into it. I can see that error being the common source of frustration later on if implemented. But overall, imposing such a limit will require a UI change and ultimately a client update which makes the idea unnecessarily complicated.
An alternative limit would be to have the HERO feature enabled when close proximity within an objective. At that point, you just have to ask yourself which objective you would enable it by. Your own objective that you are defending or the enemy's objective which you are trying to capture? This would be easier to implement as it would not likely require any UI change if I'm not mistaken and it seems like something that can be implemented server-side where CCP has more direct control over.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:10:00 -
[16] - Quote
Luther Mandrix wrote:Should we have a skill that affects lp payout? Eve has lots of skills that affect taxes and payouts for missions.
I see no problem with this. From what I understand, CCP can implement new skill books without needing a UI change and thus can make it done server-side. And you are correct that Eve Online has plenty of skills that affect payout from missions.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
Luther Mandrix wrote:Redline auto forward spawn timer . If you stay behind the redline you get auto booted forward into the map.No more falling back.
A little problem with this.
What if you are having to wait a while for the RDV to drop off your HAV because for some odd reason the RDV pilot is taking his sweet time to press the release button while you are waiting in the redline for it? Suddenly, before you get a chance to board your expensive HAV, you get auto booted to the front lines and see some blueberry bastard steal your ride while you're way up front.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:15:00 -
[18] - Quote
Luther Mandrix wrote:Middas Betancore wrote:There was a mention about increase of loss lp, it was rightly pointed out that this would end up with more sandbaggin, ppl doing the bare minimum an living off "free" payouts of loss lp, ruining gameplay for both teams Basic lp if behind redline ,extended lp if not in redline( near letter) Maybe redline should kill blues if behind it to long.Turrent on MCC could fire at friendlies for being cowards.
While I agree with the first point you made, I don't agree with the second point because it defeats the whole purpose of having a safe zone to spawn in case you ever get redlined.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:17:00 -
[19] - Quote
Middas Betancore wrote:Another point discussed during the talk was the concept of pledging for a faction
My own input was that this would increase Lp payout for you're declared faction and it's ally, perhaps standing increase too Perhaps based on ones standing level, such as a 2-5% increase per level As a negative buff for playing for the factions opposing the one you have pledged for, you simply can only get 75% LP payout but cannot gain standing but still lose standing for the opposing faction
I will keep a note of this the next time we talk about it.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
Maken Tosch
Dust University Ivy League
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:20:00 -
[20] - Quote
jordy mack wrote:i'm pretty sure i'm not a d-uni lecture host, but if i am can someone gimme a schedule. i seem to have missed all of my own lectures so far :(
I usually have my lectures every Saturday at 1900 Eve Time on the Lecture.D-UNI channel. However, the next one coming up is on hold pending real-life circumstances.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 14:36:00 -
[21] - Quote
An idea brought up by Aiden.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2817484#post2817484
Discuss.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
|
|
|