|
|
| 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.
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon Plus
2192
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 12:55:00 -
[4] - 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. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon Plus
2195
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 13:04:00 -
[5] - 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. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon Plus
2317
|
Posted - 2013.08.04 18:46:00 -
[6] - Quote
RydogV wrote:Got redirected from another thread here. Glad to see great ideas and great discussion.
Curious about the Queuing System tho...being put in a wait mode sounds a lot better than spamming the button, A LOT BETTER. But how will this affect Corporations' ability to field multiple Squads into the same match on the same side. Just picking a faction side seems pretty hit or miss, especially if there are a lot of Corps looking to fight for their favorite race.
I mean while the current FW system is a major chore, the end reward is playing with a good size number of your friends. So will the new system be able to queue multiple Squads concurrently or will it be more of a blind luck thing on busy times?
I think there's a team deploy type thing.
SoxFour seemed to imply it. |
Arkena Wyrnspire
Turalyon 514
2416
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 15:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
Dovallis Martan JenusKoll 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. What about those heavies that strafe directly into your line of fire? I've done plenty of shots that would have been Ally-Fatal because the allies just aren't paying attention... They literally jumped into my line of fire.
That is always going to be a problem with friendly fire unfortunately. Hopefully if it's turned on then people will become more aware of it. |
|
|
| |
|