Or it could be we have different ideas for FW battles. If FW battles and those for control of SOV were identical in all aspects it would be a bit redundant. We want them both to offer something different and to be different than the instant battles. More on this soon.

... O_O

I may have talked to much... Back to work for me.

I hope you are using a persistant control model and not a "attack it, win it, own it" model.

To be specific ill use my idea example

A district has a loyalty rating towards a corp from 0 to 100. You have to have a 60 to actually control it and make changes to it. The higher the number the more its worth.

corp A owns district and is attacked middle of night by corp B for UKland. They win by default since no one is on to defend. There is an 8 hour cooling off period after its been taken where the loyalty number doesn't change. After the 8 hours is up the current holders get a .5 increase per hour. All other corps loyalty will go down .5 per hour.

So it takes days of control to flip the district over. I would say make a corp only able to attack once per day but with the current mechanics of mercs in corp battles you could easily circumvent that by running multiple shell corps. Trust me if there is a way to freif I have planned for it

To comment to the Topic itself: How the FW will work

I understand that what we will get in next patch is Faction Warfare and not Player sovereign control yet, correct ?
Although My EVE experience may be limited. In my understanding FW is actually a PvP between NPC corp ? (sound confuse, isn't it? :p) 4 NPC factions just hire players to fight for them right ? If this is the case, I doubt FW in the next patch will be that different than our current pub match.

It'll still be an NPC issued contact which take place in some planets/districts. When we won that NPC employer take control of it and move on. I don't think there is anything to do with player issued contact/ player controlled district yet. This will basicly be a pub match with more reward and (hopefully) more variety of maps to separate veteran player from newberries from the old pub match. don't get me wrong, this is great enough for now. I still keen to see how full players brawl in null sec will work out. That is where the real problem lies

Yay sandbox!

OK, so what you are HOPING for is a more perfect model of WHAT capitalism is, yet in review of the ACTUAL operations of capitalism it is CONSTANTLY operating at a LOSS. Even though this is the case, capitalism STILL PERSISTS.

I find your logic in this case, especially in the fact that you are talking about warfare, which even in the context of human history HAS ALWAYS OCCURRED at a loss. War has only been profitable to a small number of people and the margin of profit in it is relative to that of a descent restaurant, which is to say running at a profit of 5-10% out of the kitchen at a cost of 20-35% total cost to the establishment for materials and labor, while the front of the house may net a 20-25% profit from the remaining 50-70% of total cost of operation.

The real matter is, like other people have stated, you are basing this off of incomplete mathematical models that are COMPLETELY based on ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS on what it will TYPICALLY cost a corp to provide defense or seizure services on provided contracts in Faction warfare.

Kain and Beers; both of you ASSUME to much, and apparently you have forgotten what assumptions do: they make and ass out of you and them.

The purpose of making this kind of interaction to run at such a potentially low margin of profit on both parts is to perpetuate the mining, wormhole exploration, trading, industrial production, and etc. that currently has grown stagnant in EVE.

Once again the Imperfects have proven their name all to well by their attempt to present an INCOMPLETE picture or what is possible through their narrow vision and INCOMPLETE understanding of CCP's intentions. This is supposed to be a Hamster wheel, nothing more. If you don't like it, get OFF.