Faction Warfare: Understanding LP Rewards from Plexes

Communications Center General Discussion
1

Hey fellow capsuleers,

Lately, I’ve been delving into the intricate world of faction warfare, trying to get a grip on its various mechanics. One thing that’s left me scratching my head is the LP (Loyalty Points) rewards from completing plexes.

There have been instances where, after a seemingly long 15-minute wait, I’ve only been awarded a mere 125 LP. It feels quite unrewarding and makes me question if I’m perhaps missing something about the LP distribution process.

Does anyone have insight into how the LP reward formula works for plex completion in faction warfare? Is there a known system or pattern behind the varying amounts of LP being awarded? Any guidance or clarity on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance, and fly safe!

2

Yeah, don’t do plexes in rearguards if you want LP. Offensive plexes in frontlines give the most.

3

Read the manual

https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Faction_warfare#Complexes_and_i-Hubs

1 Like
4

Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for!

EDIT: Except for the note “the recent update to system dynamics has altered LP payouts, so the information in the below table is no longer accurate.” How have the payout mechanics changed, and where are accurate system dynamics explained? Alternatively, what is an accurate summary of the current payout mechanics?

5

<<<< REDACTED >>>>

6 
LP Earned = base * system_type * contested_factor 
base = value from table below
system_type =
   1.0 for Operation
   1.5 for Frontline
   0.01 for Rearguard
contested_factor =
   enemy-held system: 1.0
   friendly-held system: % contested by enemy

The Eve Uni Wiki has this table which provides the base LP earned for Operations systems, and also includes a row for Frontline which is 50% extra (already includes the system_type value):

image

This is why you get more fights when dplexing (“defensive plexing”): the enemy is financially incentivized to oplex (“offensive plex”) into your systems, so defending your systems bumps you into more of the enemy.

Hope this helps.

1 Like
7

It would be nice with an explanation for why the rewards are so complicated. I guarantee noone can explain it :smiley: Not even the CCP CEO

move-along-1024x576-2019376132
move-along-1024x576-20193761321024×576 84.9 KB

8

Larger sites pay out more lp, and CCP balanced the pay outs favoring offensive plexing to promote pvp.

There, I explained it for you. And it’s really not that complex, it’s pretty easy to understand.

3 Likes
9

rofl :smiley: when offensive plexing gives more than defensive plexing you will have less pvp

10

So, converting all of this to JavaScript (because a lot of people know it) we get the following, correct? I am hoping this can be used as an accurate calculator.

// contested_factor =
//   enemy-held system: 1.0
//   friendly-held system: % contested by enemy
function calculateLp(complex_type, system_type, contested_factor) {
    let base;

    // Lookup table for LP values based on complex type
    const lpTable = {
        'Scout NVY-1': 10000,
        'Scout NVY-5': 12500,
        'Small NVY-1': 15000,
        'Small NVY-5': 18750,
        'Small ADV-1': 17500,
        'Small ADV-5': 20000,
        'Medium NVY-1': 20000,
        'Medium NVY-5': 25000,
        'Medium ADV-1': 25000,
        'Medium ADV-5': 30000,
        'Large NVY-1': 25000,
        'Large NVY-5': 30000,
        'Large ADV-1': 25000,
        'Large ADV-5': 30000,
        'Open': 30000
    };

    base = lpTable[complex_type];

    if (base === undefined) {
        throw new Error("Invalid complex type provided");
    }

    switch (system_type) {
        case 'Operation':
            system_type = 1.0;
            break;
        case 'Frontline':
            system_type = 1.5;
            break;
        case 'Rearguard':
            system_type = 0.01;
            break;
        default:
            throw new Error("Invalid system type provided");
    }

    // Calculate LP earned
    const lp_earned = base * system_type * contested_factor;

    return lp_earned;
}

// Offensive Example:
console.log(calculateLp('Scout NVY-1', 'Operation', 1.0));

// Defensive Example:
console.log(calculateLp('Medium ADV-5', 'Frontline', 0.85));
11

I’m not providing an accurate code review, but something along those lines yes.

1 Like
12

If o and d plexing paid out the same, people would just d plex in the cheapest unfit t1 frigate. This is effectively what fw was before the uprising expansion, (just with stabbed punishers.)

oplex rats don’t do a lot of damage, but they do function as a dps gate, meaning players running those sites have to have a certain amount of money on the line to run them. Which means hunters have a target.

Now, this could be improved by modeling the rest of the frontline complexes after battlefields (ie: two sets of faction npcs) and giving the same payout to both factions (unless the contested state is 0.) You would retain the dps gate benefit of oplexing, while not giving the economic incentive to be in different systems.

1 Like
13

Nice attempt at CCPsplaining while simultaneously agreeing the mechanics are bad

14

Shrug, your suggested implementation would make it worse.

It’s also incredibly arrogant to think whatever you have can’t be improved. Every game has something that can be better.

imo, I’d prefer if the pve portion of plexing was more engaging (even beyond the change I suggested,) but that would probably require dscan to have an automatic setting.

1 Like
16

Which one?

17

This one, you’re implying they should, at the very least, pay out the same.

That change would favor dplexing, since there’s no minimum damage gate.

18

This one, you’re implying they should, at the very least, pay out the same.

Of course the payout should be the same

That change would favor dplexing, since there’s no minimum damage gate.

The “damage gate” should also be the same

19

CCP could do that… turn all sites into miniature battlefields, but that doesn’t make sense thematically. It doesn’t make sense for Gallente to have attacking ships in every Caldari backline system… and vice versa. However, that does make sense for the front lines… which is the change I was suggesting:

Doing it that way, command operations and rearguard systems would remain unchanged, but front line systems would have the same payouts to both sides (unless a system was in a 0 contest state.)

This would have the side benefit of making both o and d battlefields pay out the same as well.

20

It seems to me that if you changed the NPCs in plexes from faction police to pirate and gave equal reward for defending and attacking then you have come a long way to improving FW.

But more can be done, for example micro warp drives are kind of mandatory in BFs which is a bit boring. So you can put in some anomalies that will warp people around from zone to zone when activated. This makes slow but durable builds ever so slightly more feasible.
Should the pirates that spawn give bounties? Should they drop loot? It would be farmable, but it would also be boring if it wasnt. I mean if the goal of FW is to encourage PVP, then there should be an incentive for people including neutrals to go into the plexes. And making the NPCs not drop loot and not give bounties is the wrong move then.

But lets be honest, why are we even discussing this?

1 Like
21

That doesn’t make sense in the context of the empire factions taking territory from each other.

It really isn’t complicated. Keep the frontline site sizes the same as they are currently, and just add both sets of empire faction npcs to those sites. (This is what I meant by modeling all the frontline complexes after battlefields.)

Empire fw npcs do drop loot. They drop tags, which are used to build faction modules. The value of those tags is regulated by the market, which also drop in pve, so if you want more worthwhile loot, perhaps CCP could add specific fw tags that are worth more than pve tags. (ie: less of the the fw tags would be required to build a faction module.)

There are lots of ideas to improve the overall feel of space. Not just in fw complexes, but in the game as a whole.

I’d like to see planets be given some love. Make them warp disrupt out to 100km, and warp scramble out to 30km from the surface. This would make dual prop builds a lot more common around planets, and remove the need for a point. Then obviously you’d need some content in those spaces to draw people in.

I’d like to see all sorts of different cloud phenomena… clouds that remove you from the overview, clouds that remove you from dscan, clouds that hold valuable ore but will also obscure the rocks from the overview and an ore scanner.

There are many fun things that can be done to make the geography of EVE feel a bit more fun to explore.

Neutrals go to the plexes to hunt fw farmers. But you do have a point… the central hub in the fw plex could potentially be hacked in order to retrieve something from it. That would have the desired effect of drawing in neutrals to complexes.

Alternatively, CCP could bring back the shadow war sites for people to hack which would give shards that could be assembled into a bpc for a ship of the controlling faction. (This way neutrals and enemy militia could get access to those ships as well.)

Because you said the fw rewards were too complicated to understand, and then I explained it to you in a single sentence.