DUST Search - [Feedback/Suggestion] On Faction Warfare

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback/Suggestion] On Faction Warfare

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 2180	Posted - 2013.08.01 10:38:00 - [1] - Quote The current faction warfare system is somewhat lacking, both in design and execution. There are a number of issues with it: Queuing system is flawed. Not enough battles. The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons. The district system is flawed. No different from instant battles. No incentive to bother with FW. No serious incentive to bother with orbital support, for either the eve or the dust side. Dust players canGÇÖt see the GÇÿbig pictureGÇÖ. I will suggest solutions at the end of each section. Queuing system: LetGÇÖs start with the queuing system. The system appears to be designed with the intent of allowing you to bring more than one corp squad. By allowing you to pick your side, and allowing people to queue for a specific battle, there is the foundation of a system which would properly allow this. However, this goal is prevented by a few issues. The main problem is that when trying to get two squads into a match, one is normally left behind because the battles fill up so quickly. The frustration with this is only increased by the fact that battles spawn so rarely. In practice, there is an infuriating situation where the squad leaders must watch the merc tab like hawks for upwards of 10 minutes. If a battle appears, they have to act very quickly, and often a squad can get left behind. ItGÇÖs very difficult with two squads - I have never seen a team successfully stacked all the way. The queuing system needs to be revamped. Here is my suggestion: A method of forming a team before deployment should be possible. The 3 minute queue time in the warbarge before the match starts should be separated into three parts - the team deploy time, the squad deploy time, and the individual deploy time, with a minute for each. This would prevent organised groups from being split up or stopped altogether because of random blueberries joining the match, whilst not excluding individuals who want to fight in FW. Not enough battles: Battle generation is linked of GÇÿplexingGÇÖ (the act of capturing hostile complexes) in EvE. However, it isnGÇÖt as simple as 1 plex = 1 merc battle. Testing has confirmed this, sometimes taking as many as 3 or 4 to generate, though only rarely. Some time ago I also asked CCP FoxFour on IRC, who confirmed this, though no further details were given. Not only that, but defensive plexing in EvE does not generate battles. This isnGÇÖt enough, even if the queuing system is improved. Not only this, but it creates a bottleneck for dust FW activity if EvE players arenGÇÖt active enough. Whilst IGÇÖm all for greater integration with EvE, having it in the form of limits rather than content or opportunities does not seem a promising way to go. To fix this, I would suggest that defensive plexing also generate battles, and also that the spawn rate be increased. Additionally, there should be some mechanism for letting dust teams begin battles on their own, if fully formed. This would be an ideal role for something similar to the old corp battles. Get a team together, pick a district to attack, and go straight to the warbarge. The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: The title of this section says it all, really. ThereGÇÖs no reason to fight for a particular faction or to stick with them. IGÇÖve heard about a standings system being possible, but currently this is a problem. There really should be something to encourage sticking to one faction. ThereGÇÖs quite a lot of enthusiasm from people supporting their favourite faction, and a very solid and detailed backstory for each of the factions. It seems a shame to not take advantage of this.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 2180	Posted - 2013.08.01 10:39:00 - [2] - Quote The GÇÿdistrictsGÇÖ system is flawed: This is quite a major mechanical gripe. IGÇÖm going to start by summarising the system as I understand it after fairly thorough testing with my corp and lots of activity on both the EvE and dust side. In the current system, there are a number of districts in every FW system. These can be taken to provide an advantage when fighting over control of the actual system. A faction match can be triggered after some GÇÿoffensiveGÇÖ plexing where capsuleers from one side of the conflict attack an enemy controlled star system. Matches are not generated through GÇÿdefensiveGÇÖ plexing. Once a match is generated, it picks a random district in the system, irrespective of who currently controls the district. If the side which doesnGÇÖt control the district wins, then the district flips to their control. If the side currently controlling the district wins, nothing happens. ThatGÇÖs a rough summary of the current system as I understand it, based on my own deductions. Correct me if IGÇÖm wrong, but I doubt IGÇÖm far off the mark. There are a number of problems with this system. Approaching this from a logical perspective, for example, why is it that when the Minmatar attack an Amarr system they might GÇÿattackGÇÖ their own district, thus jeopardizing it as it gives the Amarrians an opportunity to take the dsitrict? So here are the problems: 1. Battles pick a completely random district to fight over when theyGÇÖre generated. If you control 14 of the 15 districts in a system and you have a team put together with the goal of securing all the districts in the system, you may have to fight a large number of battles before you fight over the 1 out of 15 not under your control. 2. Due to the random nature of the districts being chosen, you may have to GÇÿattackGÇÖ your own district multiple times, giving the enemy a chance to take that district even though your side is the one GÇÿattackingGÇÖ. 3. Defensive plexing by capsuleers does not generate battles. If you think about this, defensive plexing is where capsuleers are forcing hostile forces out of their system. Despite this, the enemy could control districts in the system but battles wouldn't be generated and so they canGÇÖt be forced out. Battles are generated when people try to force their way into a system, why not when people are forcing others out of their system? These problems, together, make it pointless to try and assemble a faction warfare group with the specific goal of controlling districts except in major offensives, and the value there is somewhat debatable. To solve these problems, I have a couple of suggestions. Firstly, make battles generate in districts according to who is attacking who. If the Gallente are attacking, they should be attacking a Caldari district, not a Gallente one. Secondly, make battles generate from defensive plexing. If an Amarrian deplexes an Amarr system, it should generate a battle in a Minmatar district (if they have one). No different from instant battles: The actual battles themselves are identical to instant battle Skirmish matches. This makes for repetitive gameplay when you play those as well. Also, why always Skirmish? Domination matches would do fine as well. An easy, if lazy, way to make them different would be to tweak the objective values, like making the MCCs tougher and increasing the clone count. No incentive to bother with FW: The title here pretty much says it all. Why bother, as a merc? There really does need to be something. THis is one of the reasons so many people want an LP store. Perhaps some prototype level equipment from the relevant faction could appear in salvage if you won an FW match? It would also provide additional incentive to actually go and win. Higher rewards for winning but not for losing would make for a more competitive match. No serious incentive to bother with orbital support, for either the EvE side or the dust side: Orbital support is a huge pain to provide. Because of the scarcity of matches and the way theyGÇÖre generated, itGÇÖs impractical to hang around in one system fighting. Instead, your group tends to bounce all over the warzone. Very frequently, the pilots providing orbital support have to travel over a dozen jumps through hostile space. This is very dangerous and time consuming, and itGÇÖs a huge pain to deal with. And for all that hassle, you get to drop marginally bigger explosions on your enemy, a couple of times a match, which rarely makes much more of a difference than a standard precision strike, which doesnGÇÖt require that hassle. I love orbital support. I really do - ItGÇÖs a cool mechanic, but the entire system is hamstrung by the fact that you donGÇÖt actually need to bother to get GÇÿorbitalGÇÖ strikes. The pilots who travel a dozen jumps through hostile space to sit on a beacon which marks their presence to every homicidal lunatic in system just so they can provide slightly bigger explosions for no incentive are freaking heroes. But really, why should they bother? To fix this issue, better match generation would help make the pilotGÇÖs lives easier, but mainly there needs to be a reason to bring orbital support. Perhaps simply remove the precision strike option? Also reward the pilots with LP for their troubles. It doesnGÇÖt need to be much, but just having -something- for the pilots would make a big difference.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 2180	Posted - 2013.08.01 10:40:00 - [3] - Quote Dust players canGÇÖt see the GÇÿbig pictureGÇÖ: Warzone control and district control are meaningless concepts to mercs. they do nothing for them, and itGÇÖs a hassle figuring out who controls what from dust anyway. The starmap is a very cool thing, but itGÇÖs tucked away in menus and even when you get to it you need to do a lot of fiddling about to see who has what district, and you canGÇÖt see the full warzone control anyway. ThatGÇÖs not good for a game which apparently prides itself on GÇÿthe big pictureGÇÖ. IGÇÖm not entirely sure how this could be addressed. I would suggest that warzone control tier should affect rewards for mercs, but that would need people to be tied more tightly to specific factions as well as a change in the rewards system, and though it would incentivise trying to influence the warzone s a whole, it wouldnGÇÖt really raise awareness of it and might create a frustrating situation as dust players canGÇÖt capture or upgrade systems. An FW interface with a warzone map would be a helpful tool, I think. In my opinion, FW needs some love in its current state. Please discuss.

CCP FoxFour C C P C C P Alliance 27577	Posted - 2013.08.01 11:54:00 - [4] - Quote RESPONSE TIME! DERPITY DERP DERP! :P First and foremost I cannot thank you enough for posting such a well thought out and constructive thread. Truly awesome and amazingly appreciated. :D Queuing system: I mostly ignored this section, I skimmed it a bit but only just. Why would I skim it? Because we are throwing the current system out the window and replacing it with the new matchmaking system. For those that are not aware, currently when you want to join an FW match you sit there refreshing the page waiting for a battle to show up and then hope you are quick enough with being able to join before others do. It's not the greatest by any stretch. I could go into detail about why it is like what it is like... or we could talk about what's changing. So this is the reason why I only skimmed this section. We are completely revamping, actually wrapping up the changes now and getting ready to move things from our teams sandbox to the main branch next week, a new matchmaking system. One of the things the new matchmaking system does is allow us to actually queue players. So what we are going to allow you to do is take a squad, or yourself, select which faction(s) you want to fight for and then queue for them. Once we have enough people that are queueing for a faction that opposes the ones you have selected, and enough besides you queueing for the one you want to fight for, a battle is started. It should be pretty awesome. Not enough battles: Again I basically just skimmed this for the same reason as above. I will say though that there appears to be a misunderstanding as to how the current system works and I want to clear it up because I don't want it to be carried over to the new system. You seem to be under the impression that PLEXing in EVE generates the battles in DUST. That is wrong. What controls the number of battles in DUST is how many people are playing them. We spin new battles up when all the current battles are full. What PLEXing in EVE does is determine WHERE the battles in DUST take place. When a defensive or offensive PLEX is completed in a system with a temperate planet that faction gets a point in their favour for that system. As I said the spinning up of battles is not determined by this at all, battles spin up when all the current ones are full. When a battle spins up it looks at all the systems and picks one from the list based on how many points they have. Not going to go fully into the details of it but basically if the most PLEXed system is the Amarr offensive PLEXing a system then a battle will be started with Amarr attacking a district in that system. This is not changing and will be carried over to the new matchmade system that we introduce. So yes, defensive plexing does have an effect and there is no bottleneck here in generating battles based on PLEXing. Hopefully that makes more sense. The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: I have a whole design written up for changing this but it's a ways off from being implemented so I have not shared it publicly yet. It is on the backlog however and will hopefully get done late this year or early next year. To give you an idea of what is involved in it: You fight for faction, you win, you gain standings, the higher the standings the higher your reward for fighting for that side. There is a lot more to it, but that is a glimpse into it. The GÇÿdistrictsGÇÖ system is flawed: Unfortunately your understanding of the system is very flawed. Hopefully my explanation above about not enough battles helped clear it up a little bit. If you offensive PLEX a system in EVE and control all the districts in that system offensive PLEXing is not going to generate a battle of the other side attacking your district. That would be very counter productive. Again, defensive PLEXing does have an effect, again though it does not generate a battle it generates a point and the system with the most points is has priority. No different from instant battles: So again I have a much larger design about iterating on FW, part of it is about the rewards you get and making FW battles more rewarding, and part of it is about making them play different. First and foremost we want to enable friendly fire and we think if we have standings in we can do that. Shooting teammate lowers your standing, going negative means no longer being able to play FW until you pay or wait.... or something like that. Still a few details to work out. Losing standings is bad because high standings means higher reward. Remove warbarge strike and make it so that acquiring orbital bombardment is something the EVE players have to do, much like how it was at the Fanfest tournament. Allow full teams to queue. This is actually a design separate of the factional warfare iteration and is an iteration on the squads system allowing you to build squads that are entire 16 man teams. The new matchmaking system would allow you to queue for FW with these 16 man squads while restricting public matches to 6 man squads. Dust players canGÇÖt see the GÇÿbig pictureGÇÖ: Agreed and we are constantly working on improving this. We have some ideas we are currently working on but to be honest all the stuff I listed above is a much higher priority for us. Making the matches different, improving the payout, allowing full teams to compete, and that sort of thing is just more important. Again though we are constantly thinking about this and trying to include it in the designs we do work on. Hope that all helps give you a better understanding of where we are at and where we are going. So much we want to do and so little time in the day to do it. :( p.s. I really have no idea why I put derpity derp derp in the first line... yea not a clue... sorry... CCP SocksFour Game Designer // Team True Grit

Nalhe Saldana Forsaken Immortals Top Men. 89	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:05:00 - [5] - Quote Thanks for informing us, I'm very much looking forward to these changes and additions! Stuff like this is what keeps our hope for this game up =)
Absolute Idiom II Greatness Achieved Through Training EoN. 287	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:31:00 - [6] - Quote Glad to see from FoxFour that the very similar concerns I expressed in a feedback thread a few weeks ago are going to be addressed shortly https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1027937#post1027937 FoxFour, which build can we expect to see FW begin to improve?
Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 899	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:35:00 - [7] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: RESPONSE TIME! DERPITY DERP DERP! :P ...Not going to go fully into the details of it but basically if the most PLEXed system is the Amarr offensive PLEXing a system then a battle will be started with Amarr attacking a district in that system... I've asked this in multiple places and I've been ignored...glad to see its finally a shared detail.
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 2308	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:36:00 - [8] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: I have a whole design written up for changing this but it's a ways off from being implemented so I have not shared it publicly yet. It is on the backlog however and will hopefully get done late this year or early next year. To give you an idea of what is involved in it: You fight for faction, you win, you gain standings, the higher the standings the higher your reward for fighting for that side. There is a lot more to it, but that is a glimpse into it. I'm very wary of this. Dust 514 doesn't really need more ISK generation as there are a number of amazing ways to get ISK as is. A.) Planetary Conquest and the selling of clones dishes out MILLIONS to individual players. B.) Running Pub Matches with Militia/BPO gear is a great way to save ISK. C.) For those who are more KDR conscious, using an alt character with militia gear will generate millions per day that you can now trade to your main account without risking an impact on your stats. Suffice to say I think that there should be a unique reward for Factional Warfare, higher ISK gain may increase the popularity of players participating but you're going to be appealing to a percentage as there will always be players who just want to go kill stuff (I.E Ambush) Another issue is how many battles are actually generated but if your match maker works than more power to you. So, yes, I feel that there needs to be some uniqueness to fighting for a particular faction. I'm not exactly starving for ISK so right now I fight for Gallente/Minmatar because... Well... I do.
KingBlade82 The Phoenix Federation 143	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:40:00 - [9] - Quote about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates?
Avinash Decker BetaMax. 64	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:51:00 - [10] - Quote KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? Yeah , if im just going to pay then I can easily pay for it and make it up in instant action and if I have to wait then it will have to be a long wait not like a few hours to a day , but like weeks . I don't even have to kill a teammate just coax them in killing me , and let the teammate get punished.

Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 2192	Posted - 2013.08.01 12:55:00 - [11] - Quote KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? SoxFour's idea is just a basic idea, it's not fully designed yet. I would think that you'd get kicked if your standings dropped too much.
Avinash Decker BetaMax. 64	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:01:00 - [12] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? SoxFour's idea is just a basic idea, it's not fully designed yet. I would think that you'd get kicked if your standings dropped too much. Probably , but its a good idea to talk about it now so problems don't come up in the future.
Arkena Wyrnspire Turalyon Plus 2195	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:04:00 - [13] - Quote Avinash Decker wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? SoxFour's idea is just a basic idea, it's not fully designed yet. I would think that you'd get kicked if your standings dropped too much. Probably , but its a good idea to talk about it now so problems don't come up in the future. True. Perhaps something to make teamkillers a legal target for both sides.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 2794	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:07:00 - [14] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: Remove warbarge strike and make it so that acquiring orbital bombardment is something the EVE players have to do, much like how it was at the Fanfest tournament. Not even done reading your post and I'm already dancing in my chair. Can we get this for PC as well? I'm all for the WarBarge strike being there for IB matches because there's no other option, but the current WP based system means that I really don't make much of a difference. I mean, orbital strikes are supposed to be game changers, but if my team isn't getting WP fast enough I can't do anything to help them. That just seems wrong to me.
Cat Merc BetaMax. 3716	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:09:00 - [15] - Quote KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? Make it so that whatever damage he does gets mirrored to him, 2x. So he does 100 damage to you? He gets 200 damage.
steadyhand amarr Foxhound Corporation General Tso's Alliance 1015	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:13:00 - [16] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: I have a whole design written up for changing this but it's a ways off from being implemented so I have not shared it publicly yet. It is on the backlog however and will hopefully get done late this year or early next year. To give you an idea of what is involved in it: You fight for faction, you win, you gain standings, the higher the standings the higher your reward for fighting for that side. There is a lot more to it, but that is a glimpse into it. , I'm very wary of this. Dust 514 doesn't really need more ISK generation as there are a number of amazing ways to get ISK as is. A.) Planetary Conquest and the selling of clones dishes out MILLIONS to individual players. B.) Running Pub Matches with Militia/BPO gear is a great way to save ISK. C.) For those who are more KDR conscious, using an alt character with militia gear will generate millions per day that you can now trade to your main account without risking an impact on your stats. Suffice to say I think that there should be a unique reward for Factional Warfare, higher ISK gain may increase the popularity of players participating but you're going to be appealing to a percentage as there will always be players who just want to go kill stuff (I.E Ambush) Another issue is how many battles are actually generated but if your match maker works than more power to you. So, yes, I feel that there needs to be some uniqueness to fighting for a particular faction. I'm not exactly starving for ISK so right now I fight for Gallente/Minmatar because... Well... I do. Point A if your not top player you are locked out of pc by its current design. B again that's limiting gameplay for those players we may never be good enough to run the shiny gear. C is a workaround and highlights bad design. Rewards loyalty and taking part provides a natural progression from instant battles and allows new players to build up isk required to get into PC
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 2308	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:30:00 - [17] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: I have a whole design written up for changing this but it's a ways off from being implemented so I have not shared it publicly yet. It is on the backlog however and will hopefully get done late this year or early next year. To give you an idea of what is involved in it: You fight for faction, you win, you gain standings, the higher the standings the higher your reward for fighting for that side. There is a lot more to it, but that is a glimpse into it. , I'm very wary of this. Dust 514 doesn't really need more ISK generation as there are a number of amazing ways to get ISK as is. A.) Planetary Conquest and the selling of clones dishes out MILLIONS to individual players. B.) Running Pub Matches with Militia/BPO gear is a great way to save ISK. C.) For those who are more KDR conscious, using an alt character with militia gear will generate millions per day that you can now trade to your main account without risking an impact on your stats. Suffice to say I think that there should be a unique reward for Factional Warfare, higher ISK gain may increase the popularity of players participating but you're going to be appealing to a percentage as there will always be players who just want to go kill stuff (I.E Ambush) Another issue is how many battles are actually generated but if your match maker works than more power to you. So, yes, I feel that there needs to be some uniqueness to fighting for a particular faction. I'm not exactly starving for ISK so right now I fight for Gallente/Minmatar because... Well... I do. Point A if your not top player you are locked out of pc by its current design. B again that's limiting gameplay for those players we may never be good enough to run the shiny gear. C is a workaround and highlights bad design. Rewards loyalty and taking part provides a natural progression from instant battles and allows new players to build up isk required to get into PC Theoretically. My corporation often Q-Synchs faction warfare matches so that we can play together and there's nothing worse than going solo against 16 cohesive, competitive players versus your mixed bag. Factional Warfare shouldn't be used as a new player training ground, in fact it should come after the player has a solid understanding of his capabilities and has some advanced/proto gear to make effort into results. There's nothing to stop a host of veteran players with millions of SP from ruining the experience and there shouldn't be - it's factional warfare. We might not see it but these battles do matter and while I understand that new players want to explore the rabbit hole and make a difference, Faction Warfare is more of a mid-ground than a new player experience. It would be a different story if there were various tiers of Faction Warfare in Dust 514 like there is in Eve Online (small and novice complexes for example). Just as well, with prices the way they are, there is absolutely no reason a new player should ever be running low on ISK unless he is intentionally throwing his/her self into the fire for his own masochistic means.
Avinash Decker BetaMax. 64	Posted - 2013.08.01 13:34:00 - [18] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Avinash Decker wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? SoxFour's idea is just a basic idea, it's not fully designed yet. I would think that you'd get kicked if your standings dropped too much. Probably , but its a good idea to talk about it now so problems don't come up in the future. True. Perhaps something to make teamkillers a legal target for both sides. If thats the case then I can get teamkilled on purpose to have the other person it in trouble , in which i can jump in front in my teammates line of fire or jump in front on a tank's turret , shoot them but don't kill them , and destroy their equipment are some ways i can get them to kill me , if they don't I'll just keep doing it and they might getting directly killed by the enemy.
Aeon Amadi A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S. League of Infamy 2312	Posted - 2013.08.01 14:08:00 - [19] - Quote Avinash Decker wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Avinash Decker wrote: Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: KingBlade82 wrote: about the friendly fire thing i think is flawed and will always be flawed with randoms someone finds it funny to kill people and goes around stabbing people in the back and thinks hes really cool but if i try to kill him off since he keeps shooting at me its gonna hurt my standing right? so i have to hide until the end of the game so i don't lose standing and don't get chased around by a guy who thinks its funny to kill teammates? SoxFour's idea is just a basic idea, it's not fully designed yet. I would think that you'd get kicked if your standings dropped too much. Probably , but its a good idea to talk about it now so problems don't come up in the future. True. Perhaps something to make teamkillers a legal target for both sides. If thats the case then I can get teamkilled on purpose to have the other person it in trouble , in which i can jump in front in my teammates line of fire or jump in front on a tank's turret , shoot them but don't kill them , and destroy their equipment are some ways i can get them to kill me , if they don't I'll just keep doing it and they might getting directly killed by the enemy. Anyway foxfour I don't know if removing orbital bombardment well make much of a difference in fw , for randoms i doubt many players are going to go out of there way to get a eve player to get a OB . It seems like only corp 6 mans(vs randoms, corp squads seem to be more likely to have some eve players , then (no)squads of randoms) and corp 16 vs 16 will see any use of it . I've fielded Orbital Support for my corporation in Faction Warfare but it's rather difficult with the set-up time involved as well as outside influence. I did this solely because I liked having the option and it's an adrenaline rush for me as a player to have to focus on Dust/Eve at the same time but given that there's no reward for it besides a warm fuzzy feeling in the gut I doubt anyone would do it other than for the sake of supporting the Dust mercs. Which, as we all know, is a bit of a stretch when you're risking a 2,000,000 ISK investment.
Mobius Wyvern BetaMax. 2797	Posted - 2013.08.01 14:22:00 - [20] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: I've fielded Orbital Support for my corporation in Faction Warfare but it's rather difficult with the set-up time involved as well as outside influence. I did this solely because I liked having the option and it's an adrenaline rush for me as a player to have to focus on Dust/Eve at the same time but given that there's no reward for it besides a warm fuzzy feeling in the gut I doubt anyone would do it other than for the sake of supporting the Dust mercs. Which, as we all know, is a bit of a stretch when you're risking a 2,000,000 ISK investment. Hell, I was told by a member of my former alliance that EVE strikes were worthless because there was the risk I might not hit the button fast enough, so the WarBarge strikes were better.

Beren Hurin The Vanguardians 900	Posted - 2013.08.01 15:09:00 - [21] - Quote CCP FoxFour wrote: Again, defensive PLEXing does have an effect, again though it does not generate a battle it generates a point and the system with the most points is has priority I guess this is an interesting point too. What it means is that it sounds like offensive plexing is more effective at generating points for a system?
Absolute Idiom II Greatness Achieved Through Training EoN. 287	Posted - 2013.08.01 15:12:00 - [22] - Quote It's more likely that there are more people doing offensive plexing and therefore the systems with the most points are hostile systems.
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. League of Infamy 774	Posted - 2013.08.01 15:25:00 - [23] - Quote Why not team deploy?
Driftward Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 319	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:05:00 - [24] - Quote Concerning team-killing/friendly fire. The whole point of the new system is so you won't have to play with randoms. FW is set-up to be a team based endeavor. Beyond that you do have to take some chances. Perhaps in addition to standings you should add a "vote to kick" feature in the match if someone team kills. If you do it accidently you should be on comms and saying "****!! I didn't mean to, sorry man you just walked in front of the grenade i'd been cooking". Then you don't repeat it....not a problem. If someone just comes up and knifes you in the back, then you should be on comms and call that person out. The system has its pros and cons. It's a somewhat fair system that can be abused just as with friendly fire (again unlikely to happen in a team setting). The main con I see is that you have to take time away from fighting to deal with an enemy awoxxer (already damage done there) and vote to kick them. Combination system of 5 friendly kills in x-timeframe leads to an auto kick with a tiered system of votes required to kick. 1st team kill needs 9 votes, 2nd team kill needs 7 votes 3rd team kill needs 5 votes 4th team kill needs 4 votes 5th team kill needs 3 votes (if all 5 within time window then auto kick) 6th team kill needs 2 votes (if 5 consecutive kills fall within window then auto kick) 7th team kill needs 1 vote. Seems to me that if you're team killing 5 people in a match then you really shouldn't be in it anyways... Standings effects also need to be VERY significant. ie: 5mill ISK minimum to paydown say 1 point on a ten point system (need to maintain a greater than or equal to 0 standing to join matches. Getting kicked from a match with a team kill drops you a full point (can go negative). Repeat offenses (within a week say) increase the point drop as well as fighting for the opposing faction. Alternatively you can wait 1 week for 1 point to dissipate. (go towards 0, but only if you're negative and/or haven't gotten positive points toward faction in that week). With both systems that should manage both the immediate effects of team killing as well as the longer-term. Okay now discuss.
Loki Patera xCosmic Voidx The Superpowers 50	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:26:00 - [25] - Quote Flame me if this has been mentioned already - but you know the empty shelves that we have in the MQ - can we have some sort of trophy or medals displayed from our chosen faction there? A pointless collectable but I would grind away for days to get a new object in the MQ. Remember the customisable fish tank in Mass Effect?
Oso Peresoso RisingSuns 477	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:32:00 - [26] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: I've fielded Orbital Support for my corporation in Faction Warfare but it's rather difficult with the set-up time involved as well as outside influence. I did this solely because I liked having the option and it's an adrenaline rush for me as a player to have to focus on Dust/Eve at the same time but given that there's no reward for it besides a warm fuzzy feeling in the gut I doubt anyone would do it other than for the sake of supporting the Dust mercs. Which, as we all know, is a bit of a stretch when you're risking a 2,000,000 ISK investment. The set-up time is significant, the 2 million isk is not. Also, this: Quote: Hell, I was told by a member of my former alliance that EVE strikes were worthless because there was the risk I might not hit the button fast enough, so the WarBarge strikes were better. Might not be the same situation for corp battles, however, since you have a day to get into position and the eve pilot can be on voice chat with the dust guys. If I have to hide in a corp battle, run to my computer, uncloak, wait 30 seconds, then tell my squad leader to place the strike, maybe not so worth it though.
KingBlade82 The Phoenix Federation 143	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:36:00 - [27] - Quote Loki Patera wrote: Flame me if this has been mentioned already - but you know the empty shelves that we have in the MQ - can we have some sort of trophy or medals displayed from our chosen faction there? A pointless collectable but I would grind away for days to get a new object in the MQ. Remember the customisable fish tank in Mass Effect? Soon(tm) from what i heard a long time ago the MQ doors will open to have a room like that of sorts what will be in it? no one knows
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 844	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:37:00 - [28] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP FoxFour wrote: The GÇÿfactionGÇÖ part doesnGÇÖt matter other than for RP reasons: I have a whole design written up for changing this but it's a ways off from being implemented so I have not shared it publicly yet. It is on the backlog however and will hopefully get done late this year or early next year. To give you an idea of what is involved in it: You fight for faction, you win, you gain standings, the higher the standings the higher your reward for fighting for that side. There is a lot more to it, but that is a glimpse into it. , I'm very wary of this. Dust 514 doesn't really need more ISK generation as there are a number of amazing ways to get ISK as is. A.) Planetary Conquest and the selling of clones dishes out MILLIONS to individual players. B.) Running Pub Matches with Militia/BPO gear is a great way to save ISK. C.) For those who are more KDR conscious, using an alt character with militia gear will generate millions per day that you can now trade to your main account without risking an impact on your stats. Suffice to say I think that there should be a unique reward for Factional Warfare, higher ISK gain may increase the popularity of players participating but you're going to be appealing to a percentage as there will always be players who just want to go kill stuff (I.E Ambush) Another issue is how many battles are actually generated but if your match maker works than more power to you. So, yes, I feel that there needs to be some uniqueness to fighting for a particular faction. I'm not exactly starving for ISK so right now I fight for Gallente/Minmatar because... Well... I do. Point A if your not top player you are locked out of pc by its current design. B again that's limiting gameplay for those players we may never be good enough to run the shiny gear. C is a workaround and highlights bad design. Rewards loyalty and taking part provides a natural progression from instant battles and allows new players to build up isk required to get into PC The Farmville PIG needs to be slaughtered outright. The longer it is allowed to go on, the more market advantage being handed to the farmers for when we get a player market. If you ask me, A qualifies as bad design as well (also against moon goo in Eve if you're wondering). Primary sources of income in Dust should be bottom up, NOT top down.
Musta Tornius Cannonfodder PMC 543	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:42:00 - [29] - Quote /me hands his socks to FoxFour, you deserve them. Thank you for taking time to both consider what has been said and acted upon this.
Oso Peresoso RisingSuns 477	Posted - 2013.08.01 16:44:00 - [30] - Quote Alaika Arbosa wrote: The Farmville PIG needs to be slaughtered outright. The longer it is allowed to go on, the more market advantage being handed to the farmers for when we get a player market. If you ask me, A qualifies as bad design as well (also against moon goo in Eve if you're wondering). Primary sources of income in Dust should be bottom up, NOT top down. The point of "bottom-up" income generation model in Eve is that holding space allows members to generate income, rather than holding space allowing centralized, passive income sources (moons). In Dust, we have centralized passive income generation from districts, but if you wanted a bottom-up model, what would you replace it with? You would need to propose some model where holding space allows members to generate better income directly (better than instant battles) so that the planets are still a valuable thing to control, but aren't passive income generators. There's nothing however to replace it with, save introduction of PVE content that is exclusive for district owners. It just doesn't make sense. Notice that in the last month, CCP increased income generation from districts, they didn't decrease it.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.