One of the strangest strategies I’ve seen crop up in Faction War, is allowing an enemy to take a system in order to benefit from the lucrativeness of eventually taking it back. This rather backwards approach to taking sovereignty stems from the fact that the primary worth of a FW system is in taking it –not in owning it.
For example, take System A. System A is currently owned by the Amarr. To plex it from 0 to 100% contestation, the Minmatar will do an average of 150 base plexes. However, the Amarr will defend it, if only to get pvp, so the Minmatar will need to do more like 300 plexes over time to get it to 100%.
At the current Minmatar LP to ISK ratio (based on current Stabber Fleet prices), factoring in some modest pvp, and applying current warzone control payout bonuses, the Minmatar will net a low estimate of 16.3 billion isk for taking the system. This could easily reach upwards of 20 billion isk, depending on what lengths the Amarr go to to defend it.
Once the system is owned, we can upgrade it for a variety of bonuses—extra station slots that are rarely used, a few ISK taken off various sell order taxes, as well as the opportunity to save a few million on your medical clone, should you happen to lose your pod. We should probably mention that these are not privileged bonuses even, but those shared with any neutral in system.
Once you own a FW system, it essentially becomes worthless in and of itself. Ownership primarily becomes a question of numbers for warzone control purposes. So long as the Minmatar maintain a certain number of systems, it is of more monetary benefit for them to allow the Amarr to take a few systems (since defending them is of no profit) and simply taking them or other systems back for the purpose of farming the LP.
It is also important to note that when the Amarr take a system, using the same scenario in the example above but using their own LP to ISK ratio and lack of warzone control payout bonuses, they will net 4-5 billion ISK in taking a system. Therefore, for every system the Minmatar takes back that the Amarr took from them Post-Inferno, we net more than 3 times as much profit.
Just an interesting thought for a Monday afternoon.
Why do the Minmatar earn so much more than the Amarr
ReplyDeleteRight now, the Amarr’s LP store prices are 4 times as much as they were pre-Inferno, whereas the Minmatar’s LP store prices are half the price. Market prices have adjusted a little (Minmatar faction ships are a little cheaper, and the Amarr faction ships are a little more expensive) though outside factors prevent them from changing too much.
DeleteTherefore, the Minmatar’s LP is worth significantly more than the Amarr’s LP.
Minmatar do not own all the systems. Therefor you have systems you can farm already.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you need more systems to farm?
Letting amarr take more systems seems a pretty risky strategy. (If that is really what you are doing.) Owning a system is not worthless. It is the reason why your lp is several times more valuable as your enemies lp.
I would say this aspect of the game is pretty much working as intended.
-Cearain
Owning a system is NOT why our LP is worth more. Owning a LOT of systems is. We can easily lose a handful of systems and still maintain our warzone control level. Since offensive plexing is lucrative, and defensive plexing is not, there’s no POINT wasting time on defensive plexing systems we don’t essentially need when we can spend that time offensively taking other systems to replace the lost systems, and get LP for our efforts.
DeleteCearain, you have missed the point. Let's say the Minmatar goal is to farm 5 systems per day for LP. No matter what the current state is, the eventual static equilibrium desired is then for Minmatar to allow the Amarr to control 5 systems. Every day, Minmatar would allow the Amarr to take 5 new systems, to replace the 5 systems the Minmatar plexed that day. If the Amarr weren't consistent plexers, then you'd have to allow them a buffer of a few extra systems in case they slacked on plexing for a day or two. This is a form of win-trading, a condition found in basically every MMO that incentivizes PVP participation in this manner.
DeleteAs you can see, knowledge of the current state is not relevant to analyzing the desired end state. I'd try to explain where you went wrong, but your argument was quite vague and so I honestly don't know.
Given the relatively few systems the Amarr currently hold, there is a limited amount of space available for the Minmatar to farm LP. Just because we "have systems to farm already" doesn't mean that an additional system to farm can't be beneficial. LP whores are already pretty common, given the number of people who all want to plex in a given area. Check out my post here: http://onemanblob.blogspot.com/2012/06/word-on-lp-whores-what-would-you-do.html to give your opinion on "LP whoring."
Delete#firstworldproblems
Galdorne your blog doesn't seem to let anonymous people post so here is what I wrote there:
DeleteGood Blog. This happened to me I didn't do anything.
I also did this to corpmate because I had the tab that only had enemies on my overview. I came into a medium and was like "oh cool only a minute left!" When I finally got around to looking at local where he had mentioned something I offered to warp off and let him have it but he said it was fine. (probably because we are pretty chill - perhaps because our lp isn't worth anything.)
Is ccp doing this to create drama? Clearly the old rule that applied to who would get standing increases would be a better way to work this. The lp goes to an individual if and only if:
1) They are the pilot who was within orbit range of the button for the longest continuing time right before and during the plex closing.
or
2) They are a member of the fleet of someone who fits the description above and they are on grid when the plex closes.
-Cearain
As far as the arguments concerning this blog I have not played wow. So I don't know if the side with more territory had the equivalant of a 16x lp advantage for holding a large number of systems. (not to mention station lock outs, but I still think that is a bad idea so I'm not going to really trumpet that mechanic.)
DeleteI suspect we would find some pretty significant differences between eve and wow if we looked, but whatever, lets just focus on eve.
As for your situation here I think you are just describing a balancing mechanic - not a problem. Of course it is somewhat of a problem for you guys because you went into the inferno consequences game 11-59. (I'm not complaining just stating a fact) So yes the things that are causing you problems from farming as much as you like, and further increasing your lead are best described as balancing mechanics.
You don't have enough systems to farm. Ok. That will mean some people will not be satisified with the plex farming on this front and they will go to farm caldari systems. As they leave the amarr will tend to plex more offensive systems than the minmatar for the same amount of defensive plexing. That means minmatar will start to lose systems on the amarr-minmatar front. Amarr will gain space and voila - balance.
Because of the 16x multiplier I don't think we will see many agreements on what to plex or how much to plex lasting very long between warring factions in eve.
With so many heavy handed advantages which favor simply joining the winning side I am hestitant to also mitigate the *only* balancing factor in this war. That said, no reward for defensive plexing is pretty ham fisted, I agree. I just still think its unbalanced in favor of the winning side and don't see any proposals that keep any semblence of balance.
The proposal Susan posted on EVE-O just seems to erase the only balancing mechanic in the game. If I missed something there then I'd be interested in hearing it.
-Cearain
Cearain,
DeleteMy primary point in all of this is not to devise a means to somehow gain the Minmatar more plexing ground. If you think that, you've somewhat missed the point.
My primary premise is that the underlying mechanics of risk vs. reward are skewed, and that the primary philosophy upon which the mechanics are based is illogical. I realize this sounds 'big' or like I'm ultimately trying to completely revamp the mechanics to some people, but this is not the case either.
I actually love the new FW mechanics, and think that with a few minor tweaks we could potentially change the underlying motives in such a way that not only fixes a lot of balancing issues, but also goes more to encourage a longer term season of pvp.
My PRIMARY concerns are:
-any system that encourages Factions to give up space, or to not defend space for ulterior monetary benefits ultimately discourages pvp. A system that encourages people to fight over and defend their space would greatly encourage pvp in the long run.
-any system where the risk decreases as the benefits increase is ultimately broken. This permeates our current system, as I will illustrate in upcoming posts.
Ironically, the solution I presented on the forums ( a solution that I will be talking about here in the future, as well as adding to) actually helps the underdog in a big way, and adds additional risk to the 'winning' side that would make it more difficult to maintain space. The fact that many Amarr instantly took the proposal as Minmatar whining for more stuff somewhat amuses me, as I was fully expecting it to be the Minmatar to put water in my gas tank, if you know what I mean.
Either way, that was my first run at a solution --most of which still holds in my opinion. Ultimately, however, I am not married to any specific solution or idea, so long as the underlying problem is fixed.
You still have not said how your proposal would provide balance. Why would any amarr want your proposal? I am sure I am missing something. Because I see nothing in that system that helps the underdog.
DeleteWhat you have now (although not exactly) is somewhat of a military industrial complex. Your militia has a financial motivation to keep the war going. If you win the war and take all systems the money stops! This is actually not really unlike the real world when monetary concerns can have tension with higher principles.
But this is a game so you try to game it. So you try to play the puppeteer. Keeping some systems in play and to keep the money flowing. However that is a pretty dangerous game and a difficult one. I don't think the minmatar will be able to keep that up. I would say things will start falling apart for them in about 6 months. Why?
Well at least 3 reasons:
1) because people will start to see that they make more isk mission running than they do plexing.
2) They will start to see that they make more isk farming plexes for gallente than they do farming against marr.
3) Minmatar are cashing out their lp. Amarr are holding on to it. As the lp the amarr have continues to pool up they will have much higher economic incentives to keep plexing and pushing. As Minmatar cash out they will have little incentive to keep running plexes. Because the amount of lp amarr get for their offensive plexing isn’t too much less than what minmatar gets they are building up a huge potential isk bank if they take systems. This may lead to deals. (BTW your proposal seems to trample on this subtle balancing mechanic because your proposal actually makes it so the other militia gets less lp and therefore never has that huge potential gain from taking systems.)
None of these factors were mentioned in any of the blogs you site to BTW.
You claim you don’t have incentive to defend plexes. Well I think you are talking a bit too general there. Yes you do have incentive to defend. You have an incentive to drive enemies out of plexes and defend them in pvp. Because then you can protect your lp return in a fun and fast way. However, I do agree that the incentive to do defensive plexing as a form of pve is pretty low on the list. This actually drives pvp though. Why? Because it gives you an incentive to drive that amarrian off of the plex *before* he can capture it. That way you don’t have to spend time orbiting a button for nothing.
I do agree that with the current mechanics it is unrealistic to expect the minmatar will be able to defend plexes using pvp before they are captured. I do think ccp should add something to help you know when plexes are being taken so that you can defend them in pvp. But that is a different topic.
-Cearain
BTW the idea that minmatar will start to crumble in 6 months is not really a prediction I have allot of faith in. I would say if I *had* to bet I would predict that. But there is allot of speculation in that prediction unlike other predictions I made in the past.
DeleteI do still think the game is still horribly unbalanced for the losing side so an amarr comback may not happen.
-Cearain
"You still have not said how your proposal would provide balance."
DeleteThat is because the issue is not an issue of balance. You are looking at things from the perspective of political balance between the Amarr and the Minmatar, and what is 'fair' in your opinion.
The issues I am discussing have to do with logical issues of Risk VS. Reward. Yes, fixing these WILL improve game balance, for both the Amarr (greatly so) and the Minmatar. But the point of fixing Risk vs. Reward issues is to increase the effectiveness of the sandbox, not to make things more easier, or balanced for some specific political group.
The rest of your argument is irrelevant to what I'm talking about, to be honest.
Won't this massive advantage result in everyone joining Minmatar?
ReplyDeleteWho would want to be on the loosing side. It doesn't seem a massively well thought out strategy by the devs. Good for the Minmatar though.
An interesting observation! Did you know that out of all four militia, the Minmatar have had the largest percentage increase in numbers? (The Caldari has had the greatest increase in sheer pilots.)
DeletePerhaps a topic for a future post....;)
It is a very one sided game mechanic, the gallente/caldari war is the same way.
ReplyDeleteIf you are joining FW for pvp purposes then you would join to the oppsing side, if you want to join mainly for the LP benefits, then you join the winning side.
Depends on how much you want to pvp or just plex.
Statistics, and numbers would prove you wrong actually.
DeleteThe Minmatar currently have the *best* LP store benefits. They are also netting the most pvp kills.
Mostly I think your logic is backwards. The Minmatar don't pvp less because we have more LP benefits, we have more LP benefits because we pvp more. =)
Could you elaborate on what statistics and numbers are you talking about that prove anything?
DeleteYou have more lp benefits because you have sasawong. He *individually* has more vp than any minmatar corportation.
Plexing is still best done as a pve activity where you only take fights you are almost sure to win.
-Cearain
So join either Minmatar or Gallente then?
ReplyDeleteJoin minmatar and plex against caldari.
Delete-Cearain
I'd expect CCP to fix that little oopsie like Blizzard did theirs. In WoW the main PvP battleground was set up like that for a while, then everyone figured it out and began swapping it back and forth for maximum point production. A week later...
ReplyDeleteOnce people (including CCP) understand the situation, I agree that they it will be pretty quickly changed. =) The challenge, is making people understand the full breadth of what is going on!
DeleteGlad that you recognized. I commented it on the day of the patch notes. Again: it's exactly the same failure that Blizzard did with Tol Barad: high rewards for capping, no rewards for defending.
ReplyDeleteSoon no one will defend a system and the factions will take turns to farm LP
What is this Blizzard you speak of? And Tol Barad? ;)
DeleteYOU don't have to know about these. CCP devs not know about World of Warcraft would be the dumbest fail of game development history.
DeleteIn short: Tol Barad is (was) a faction warzone very similar to EVE. It could be capped by taking objectives and the winners had access to farming sites.
However the reward for winning the battle was great enough to reach collusion between the sides. They not only laughably not defended (like standing idly outside the "button") but openly sabotated and verbally harassed those who tried to defend.
Blizzard had to hotfix this, making fighting less profitable than other PvP activities (unless you could crush the enemy). From this I know the future: CCP will remove rewards for plexing leaving rewards only for ownership itself.
I honestly think only time will tell. Re-balancing is inevitable, so lets see how it plays out for awhile and then make changes. In a way, the changes, almost no matter what, are the best part. People want to try the new system, want to see how it works. So lets really get our teeth into this new mechanic and after awhile it will be stale and it's flaws obvious to all, while the solutions to the flaws will be hotly debated. Then ccp will change it and we will all have fun trying the new system and finding it's flaws.
ReplyDeleteTime tells lots.
DeleteHowever, math also tells lots, and honestly I'd rather identify obvious problems now, rather then waiting until staleness hits us in the butt.
"Didn't want those systems anyway."
ReplyDeleteDawww your propaganda is cute- but it lacks chikunz and durrdurrdurr so is ultimately flawed.