*Does proposed feature include ideas about PvE modules that are required to be fit to complete FW objectives?
Explanation: Any module that is required necessitates a change in a ship’s layout, must compromise the fitting of the ship in question, and has the potential to shift the meta towards ships which can afford the absence of a pvp module in its place or minimize the effect that this module would otherwise have in negatively impacting the full potential or viability of the ship in question.
Result: If it is a high slot module (entosis), ships like the Atron, drone dmg ships like the Algos, and assault frigates will be used. On top of this, all fw pilots will be placed at a disadvantage against neutrals that have no such requirement to gimp their fit. If it is a mid (hacking or analyzer), armor ships will be prevalent over shield in ships destroyer and below, and cruisers also to a lesser degree, or gimped shield fits. In short: PvE modules is a bad idea if you want to encourage pvp at its best. To reiterate, nothing PvE that acts as an obstacle or condition can improve PvP in Eve, because the PvE has and will always call for efficiency fits that are not congruent with the PvP meta.
*Do proposed changes require a rework/redesign of the entire system? Guaranteeing that we will get nothing for another year.
*Does it encourage more farming or more Pvp? Does it reward PvP over farming? Does it bring rewards and penalties into balance, which would encourage commitment and dedication towards respective factions?
If we want them to mean anything, it must stand alone with PvP activity and bashing hubs. Remove rank promotions from mission turn-in’s. The fact that you can become a general in one day of hard missioning, a purely PvE activity, defeats the purpose of any special recognition, item or condition that can currently be introduced to reward high ranking pilots. Any rewards considered for bashing hubs should qualify only for pilots that have contributed more than 1% of the total damage towards the destruction on the infrastructure hub, but those doing less should still show up on the kill report.
(I removed a statement that followed the brief ideas checklist after some feedback. I realize it was off-topic and will reserve it for a separate post.)