open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] EVE, a new shard, a new age.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.16 08:40:00 - [1]
 

I have come to the conclusion, that it is time to split the future of EVE from it's current incarnation. What I propose is the following:

Retroactively remove new iterations of EVE from the current server, going back to before Dominion sometime after releasing Incarna. - At least give the players the chance to experience what they will be missing, before removing it entirely.

- The current server will no longer see expansions in the direction of the past few years, which will make a lot of the older playerbase happy.
- Business can continue as usual here, and players who like that can return to what they enjoy, with no future prospect of MT, the new character creator, recent Sovereignity mechanics changes, or the like. Basically everything everybody has been complaining about for the past three years with every new expansion an alteration to their beloved game.
- Leave in wormholes, T3's, new planets and the like. I'm sure none of them have much issue with that overall.
- Most importantly: No Dust bunnies.

Invest in a new server for a new shard, and announce the coming release of EVE 2, hopefully by another name as I'm just using that for projection purposes.

- Introduce EVE 2 with all the new developments in early 2012. This includes the Carbon Character Creator, Carbon Framework, MT, Incarna, support for the coming Dust 514, etc...
- EVE will be reborn. There will be no option to move Characters from the existing shard to the new one. All players who enter the new New Eden, will start from scratch and have to develop everything from an empty Universe rife with possibilities.
- Split ISK 4.0 into two seperate iterations; one designed for the current EVE, and one for the new Shard. Expand and redevelop both into guidebooks for their respective shards, and lay out the fundamentals of character planning, Corporation building, and all the rest within their pages.
- Players who are looking forward will likely restart on the new server, quickly populating it with varying levels of experience, and reinventing the wheel in an untouched Universe. I know I will.

Continue with team BFF and the thousand little things, ask the current veteran playerbase to share their opinions of where the current EVE Universe should go, and seperate your vision of the future from theirs.

- Any bug fixing of shared content will benefit both shards.
- All the new content, liked by many of the playerbase, will be available on the new server.
- Ship balancing can carry across both servers.
- EVE can retroactively split along seperate paths, in totally different directions for the next few years. Perhaps at some point, they will begin to parallel each other again, but I imagine that will take some time.
- Dust 514 can thrive with a New Eden brought to life only short months before it's existance.
- Most importantly: We can do away with the current trend of rage-quitting, renew old subscriptions, bring back bitter vets, and everyone will be happy.

See, I'm happy.Very Happy

Running out of space. One more post coming.

FlameGlow
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2011.06.16 08:55:00 - [2]
 

Go to chinese server, they're running older versions there and still use mostly t1 ships and modules

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.16 09:22:00 - [3]
 

1.) Importantly, I'd like to suggest changes to the new shard that include doing away with current aggression mechanics, in favor of a system that actually places characters on one of two sides in an ongoing battle, (Good vs Evil if you will), which perhaps even replaces the need for Faction Warfare.

This would give criminals rights in low security space, (where they have the benefit of corrupt and scandalous officials to support them), and give others, (sorry, EVE doesn't have the precedence of a name for players who achieve high security status, while being law abiding and just), rights in high security space.

These two area's of space would define the borders of the warzones, and each would be fair game within the others space. A certain Neutral standing would occur between -2 and +2 Security status, where things would be much the same as they are now.

Concord would protect anybody above -2 Security status in High Security space, and gate guns would fire on anyone ganking anyone in Lowsec with greater than -2 Security status. This would result from a lack of notoriety, for which the corrupt officials would have little respect or fear, and thus operate according to local laws.

The other side of this, is those same criminals who have the run of Lowsec, would be valid targets in High security space, to any individual who has greater than +2 Security status. The war would exist on these fronts, and security status gain or loss would be properly balanced to enhance this sort of gameplay.

Any player kill would prevent the gain of security status for a certain period, resulting in a cooldown timer. Security status gain would become directly impacted by where player kills are made.

A +2 Security status character killing a Criminal in Lowsec would result in a gain of security status, negating the cooldown timer for that character on that kill.

-2 or worse Criminals killing each other anywhere, would not result in a cooldown timer, and would cause neither a gain or loss of Security status.

Nullsec Rats would have no impact on security status gain, while having the highset monetary reward. High and Lowsec Rats would have variable monetary rewards and difficulty, equating to varying degrees of reward within the standard monetary range, while having a reduced impact on security status.

The overall impact of these Security status increases would be minimal, and not greatly impact any characters security status.

Police would become targetable as Rats are, exist only in High and Lowsec, and have the same varying rewards and difficulties of Highsec and Lowsec Rats.

Faction standings would become affected by this ongoing conflict based on which space you pursue your activities in. Powerful Criminals could actually gain standing in low Security space, due to there involvement with corrupt officials, while seeing only a minor loss for pursuing their activities in Highsec. +2 or greater Security status players would see faction standings increase for pursuing their activties against Criminals in High Security space, while seeing no impact in low security space.

- All levels of Missions would be available in all space, to account for these changes.

- Highsec Characters would still be penalized for podkilling Criminals in High Security space, and recieve a cooldown timer on Security status gain for doing so in Lowsec.

2.) I'd also like to suggest implementing changes to standings mechanics, such that being a part of one faction and running missions, does not neccessarily mean you are enemies with two others.

How often does one soldier take on the rage against an empire? Okay, quite often, but I still think it's a little extreme. At least offer us the ability to make a checklist of who we are willing to engage, so our agents can look it over and quietly shuffle those other missions to the back of the pile.

That's about it for now. That security status/ongoing war thing is quite involved.

o/

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.16 09:30:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Mars Theran on 16/06/2011 09:30:29
Originally by: FlameGlow
Go to chinese server, they're running older versions there and still use mostly t1 ships and modules


I would actually be dropping this server and moving to the new one, as I mentioned in my post. Feel free to argue what should be kept on this server, if such a thing should happen however. Honestly, I've felt that this should happen for some time, as I've seen the opposition between the playerbase grow more and more intense since Dominion.

I think the first time it occured to me was nearly 6 months ago.

You can't make everybody happy, and keep it all on one server at the same time. Currently it trends towards the older players being ****ed off and left out. I'm not sure which one you are.

Feel free to discuss what you would like to keep of the current trend on the current server, however.

0hai
Posted - 2011.06.16 13:41:00 - [5]
 

So, If I understand you correctly,

You want to essentially double CCP's server costs, double their maintenance time, really DOUBLE the cost of maintaining EVE; all while suggesting that the most populous Single-Shard universe on the planet should be split? All because 'older players' (read: you) are mad at recent changes?

Here's a little tidnibblet: Eve has undergone changes, especially in the past three years, and their subscription base continues to grow. Why, with no real incentive other than saving face (a quality which CCP really doesn't care about) and increasing their overhead would they do this?

Can't tell if troll or just stupid.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.06.16 14:23:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: 0hai
Can't tell if troll or just stupid.


Check his post history and the answer will become clear, unfortunately.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.17 02:49:00 - [7]
 

Apparently, someone failed to realize that servers are low maintenance compared to development. ..or did you think that 50-75K a year per developer would cost less than server maintenance?

..and you're calling me stupid or troll Rolling Eyes

Let's see.. Current developers working for CCP:
Quote:
What started as a small bunch of avid gamers with a dream of creating a space game, has now become a 600+ person game development company
multiplied by an average wage of approx. $72K, (just a guess, but it's not unreasonable), comes to approx. $43,272,000 per year.

Nah.. servers must cost more than that.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.17 03:08:00 - [8]
 

You donb't have to like it. or even agree with it, but the idea is up there. I should have expected that the only posts I'd get are the usual flaming and trolling as per usual, or even responses that suggest I'm a troll.

Forums as usual. No surprise here.

Lykouleon
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.06.17 03:20:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Mars Theran
I should have expected that the only posts I'd get are the usual flaming and trolling as per usual, or even responses that suggest I'm a troll.


You suggested something that goes 100% against the idea behind EVE and the direction CCP wants to take.

gb2WoW if you want multi-shards. Seriously.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.17 04:13:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Mars Theran on 17/06/2011 04:20:09

I played maybe 5 minutes of WoW in my life; found it dreadfully boring.

As for EVE and new Shards, I don't say this because I want EVE to split up into two shards, but more because I see it becoming an inevitability. Since the release of Dominion, the EVE playerbase has become steadily more and more disatisfied with the current direction of EVE, with numerous players quitting, cancelling subs, and/or working actively at ruining CCP's reputation.

It has developed to the point where specific groups are actively targeting CCP and EVE Online, and attempting to dissuade new players from subbing, or continuing subscriptions. This does not look good for the future of EVE, despite that some of us remain loyal and a few of us believe CCP is doing the right thing. Others do not, and more players are following the trend of dissatisfaction with every new expansion or release of content, and every live blog that details CCP's plans for the next series of updates.

The only exception to this trend, is when CCP releases a Dev Blog detailing fixes on old, legacy content, which they are preferentially holding back on, until they can properly release it under the Carbon Framework. CCP has already released blogs to this effect, but an impatient player populace is unsatisfied with the lack of a quick delivery to solve their problems.

Moreover, players are unhappy with the current projections of MT in a pay-2-play EVE, and have no intention of giving the service any credit or merit, even before it has been released on a trial run scheduled for the 21st of June. No more than 2 days before EVE TQ is migrated to the new server cluster.

Players rant and vent about CCP not meeting their expectations and lacking any consideration for the playerbase, yet these things are being done. None the less, players continue to cancel subs and enact bitter vengeance on CCP through inconsiderate and inflammatory posting, which is generally in poor taste and lacking in foresightedness, while generally being completely ignorant of the facts as they are presented.

So I posted this, and read it or not, this is my feeling on the matter. I'd rather it was not the case, but when the playerbase in general won't even acknowledge the need for some controls on how PvP is forced on players who haven't the time or inclination for it, while lacking the ISK to support such activities, among other things, I would say EVE is riven by opposing viewpoints and thoroughly steeped in animosity.

Some thoughts on the matter of CCP and EVE, from 00Sage00. I do not agree with him in the slightest, but there it is.

edit:

EVE Online currently has two active servers, in China and the UK. Respectively, they are Serenity and Tranquility. There is precedence.

I'd also like to note a blog by another pilot, which mentions the rift in EVE of which I was speaking, and it is not an uncommon viewpoint. This essentially mirrors how I feel, though I have not been so much subject to this phenomena as witness to it.

Nariya Kentaya
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
Posted - 2011.06.17 04:17:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Mars Theran
I played maybe 5 minutes of WoW in my life; found it dreadfully boring.

As for EVE and new Shards, I don't say this because I want EVE to split up into two shards, but more because I see it becoming an inevitability. Since the release of Dominion, the EVE playerbase has become steadily more and more disatisfied with the current direction of EVE, with numerous players quitting, cancelling subs, and/or working actively at ruining CCP's reputation.

It has developed to the point where specific groups are actively targeting CCP and EVE Online, and attempting to dissuade new players from subbing, or continuing subscriptions. This does not look good for the future of EVE, despite that some of us remain loyal and a few of us believe CCP is doing the right thing. Others do not, and more players are following the trend of dissatisfaction with every new expansion or release of content, and every live blog that details CCP's plans for the next series of updates.

The only exception to this trend, is when CCP releases a Dev Blog detailing fixes on old, legacy content, which they are preferentially holding back on, until they can properly release it under the Carbon Framework. CCP has already released blogs to this effect, but an impatient player populace is unsatisfied with the lack of a quick delivery to solve their problems.

Moreover, players are unhappy with the current projections of MT in a pay-2-play EVE, and have no intention of giving the service any credit or merit, even before it has been released on a trial run scheduled for the 21st of June. No more than 2 days before EVE TQ is migrated to the new server cluster.

Players rant and vent about CCP not meeting their expectations and lacking any consideration for the playerbase, yet these things are being done. None the less, players continue to cancel subs and enact bitter vengeance on CCP through inconsiderate and inflammatory posting, which is generally in poor taste and lacking in foresightedness, while generally being completely ignorant of the facts as they are presented.

So I posted this, and read it or not, this is my feeling on the matter. I'd rather it was not the case, but when the playerbase in general won't even acknowledge the need for some controls on how PvP is forced on players who haven't the time or inclination for it, while lacking the ISK to support such activities, among other things, I would say EVE is riven by opposing viewpoints and thoroughly steeped in animosity.

Some thoughts on the matter, from 00Sage00.



fact is, your wanting them to deviate from the LAST FREAKING THING they ahvent deviated from yet, so your just wanting to splitt he playerbase, which in the longrun will serve little to no actual purpose.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.17 04:31:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Nariya Kentaya
Originally by: Mars Theran
I played maybe 5 minutes of WoW in my life; found it dreadfully boring.

*snip*



fact is, your wanting them to deviate from the LAST FREAKING THING they ahvent deviated from yet, so your just wanting to splitt he playerbase, which in the longrun will serve little to no actual purpose.


Actually, there are benefits to splitting the playerbase, which I haven't mentioned here yet. One is that a new server and shard, (with a fresh start), will be at first free of RMT, and have a great many opportunities available for the players that go there. The other primary benefit, is that the players who stay here, will see a massive drop in competition in the economy as players leave this server for another. Nullsec space will open up, and Jita will lose a great many traders, while wormhole space will see a drop in active players claiming space there.

Another benefit for TQ, would be the trend to develop according to the player interests. Currently, for the older players most likely to stay, this includes fixing of old content, rollback of certain unwelcome developments like the current Sov Mechanics, and most importantly, they get to keep their griefing.

Call it a splitting of the servers between light and dark, new and old, and allowing each to develop along their own progressive paths. It wouldn't be such a bad thing, and I for one, would actually welcome the change. I would also be somewhat saddened to see and acknowledge, (finally and without doubt), that the current Shard of Tranquility cannot exist for all of us.

It is my thought that it can't, and some of us will have to move on and leave you to your grief.

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.06.17 13:14:00 - [13]
 

If you no longer like the direction Eve is going, stop playing. No need for old shard and new shard, no need for CCP to cut into their profit margins building out a new server cluster for those who cannot (or will not) adapt to the changing environment of the game.

To paraphrase a meme: Adapt or unsub.

Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos
Word of Chaos Undivided
Posted - 2011.06.17 22:30:00 - [14]
 

As soon as Serenity went online, the single shard mantra became rhetoric.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:16:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: De'Veldrin
If you no longer like the direction Eve is going, stop playing. No need for old shard and new shard, no need for CCP to cut into their profit margins building out a new server cluster for those who cannot (or will not) adapt to the changing environment of the game.

To paraphrase a meme: Adapt or unsub.


I think I've stated in about 14 different ways, that I'm happy with the direction EVE is taking; it does seem everyone else has a problem with it. Lots of requests for rollbacks here.

De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Norse'Storm Battle Group
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:19:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Mars Theran
Originally by: De'Veldrin
If you no longer like the direction Eve is going, stop playing. No need for old shard and new shard, no need for CCP to cut into their profit margins building out a new server cluster for those who cannot (or will not) adapt to the changing environment of the game.

To paraphrase a meme: Adapt or unsub.


I think I've stated in about 14 different ways, that I'm happy with the direction EVE is taking; it does seem everyone else has a problem with it. Lots of requests for rollbacks here.


Sorry, that was meant to be a more general statement - not directed at you per se.

My apologies my meaning was less than clear. Smile

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.18 01:55:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: De'Veldrin
Originally by: Mars Theran
Originally by: De'Veldrin
If you no longer like the direction Eve is going, stop playing. No need for old shard and new shard, no need for CCP to cut into their profit margins building out a new server cluster for those who cannot (or will not) adapt to the changing environment of the game.

To paraphrase a meme: Adapt or unsub.


I think I've stated in about 14 different ways, that I'm happy with the direction EVE is taking; it does seem everyone else has a problem with it. Lots of requests for rollbacks here.


Sorry, that was meant to be a more general statement - not directed at you per se.

My apologies my meaning was less than clear. Smile


Appreciate that. Smile

Devron Taal
Posted - 2011.06.19 05:08:00 - [18]
 

I really don't follow how emptying jita of traders and players from wormhole spaces is a good thing. Heck why is a 'fresh start' a good thing? Is it so that you will have a whole bunch of noobs starting up an economy all over again? So that you can race to be the first with a raven battleship again???.
?

How is this good? Sounds like the have nots are just wanting a chance to be a haves.
The world doesn't work that way sorry.

And jump starting a whole economy that has taken 9 years to get almost completely self sufficient with npc seeding all over again isn't what I would call progress by any standard.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.19 06:29:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Devron Taal
I really don't follow how emptying jita of traders and players from wormhole spaces is a good thing. Heck why is a 'fresh start' a good thing? Is it so that you will have a whole bunch of noobs starting up an economy all over again? So that you can race to be the first with a raven battleship again???.
?

How is this good? Sounds like the have nots are just wanting a chance to be a haves.
The world doesn't work that way sorry.

And jump starting a whole economy that has taken 9 years to get almost completely self sufficient with npc seeding all over again isn't what I would call progress by any standard.


You're right of course; forget I ever brought it up. Smile

I realize the rebuilding of an entire economy would take some time and effort. No need to seed it with npc's I'm sure, as everyone pretty much knows how to use blueprints already. Some needed drops from combat sites would be neccessary of course, and they would have to make a few changes to starter ships, so they have a little more functionality in the game.

All part of the deal of course. The hardest thing would be getting past the first Mining Barge construction. After that, I suspect things would go much smoother. Sure would be a neat ride though. Very Happy

Cry Nova
Posted - 2011.06.19 22:05:00 - [20]
 

On the note of forcing players into PVP, it's the reason I play EVE.

I've been a WoW player for over 4 years and the reason I keep coming back to EVE is because there is actual DANGER in this game: you never know what's beyond the next jump gate or whether or not the random pilot that just showed up is going to try to kill you or help you.

While Blizzard (and subsequently other developers) keeps nerfing world PvP in order to make it "fair," CCP is one of the few out there that understands true PvP: Nothing is unfair. If you don't want to PvP, stay in highsec. Risk vs Reward is the name of the game in Lowsec and Nullsec.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.20 00:04:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Cry Nova
On the note of forcing players into PVP, it's the reason I play EVE.

I've been a WoW player for over 4 years and the reason I keep coming back to EVE is because there is actual DANGER in this game: you never know what's beyond the next jump gate or whether or not the random pilot that just showed up is going to try to kill you or help you.

While Blizzard (and subsequently other developers) keeps nerfing world PvP in order to make it "fair," CCP is one of the few out there that understands true PvP: Nothing is unfair. If you don't want to PvP, stay in highsec. Risk vs Reward is the name of the game in Lowsec and Nullsec.


I don't know about everybody else, but I pretty much know when someone is going to try to gank me. It's about as obvious as bacon.

Navira Rel'kan
Posted - 2011.06.20 04:09:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Mars Theran
Originally by: Cry Nova
On the note of forcing players into PVP, it's the reason I play EVE.

I've been a WoW player for over 4 years and the reason I keep coming back to EVE is because there is actual DANGER in this game: you never know what's beyond the next jump gate or whether or not the random pilot that just showed up is going to try to kill you or help you.

While Blizzard (and subsequently other developers) keeps nerfing world PvP in order to make it "fair," CCP is one of the few out there that understands true PvP: Nothing is unfair. If you don't want to PvP, stay in highsec. Risk vs Reward is the name of the game in Lowsec and Nullsec.


I don't know about everybody else, but I pretty much know when someone is going to try to gank me. It's about as obvious as bacon.


exactly, especially since in low-sec, alot of people dont even try to be subtle, iw as going from amarr to a couple low-sec systems to deliever items a friendly corp wanted, second i got into mai, saw this abaddon, thought nothing of it, warped to next gate lo and behold once i reach jump range, i see this same abbadon warp into right behind, kept following for about 4 systems, at taht point i decided i was bored of him and called the corp-buds i was delivering to. next agte he went through he targeted me, and i had about 15 buddies, 3 in logistics to rep me, completely annihilate the bugger. so yeah, ganking and stalking/hunting in low-sec is a pretty obvious thing, even more so in high sec.

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.06.20 04:25:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Cry Nova
If you don't want to PvP, stay in null sec


Fixed 4U

Wink

RZM25
Posted - 2011.06.21 00:13:00 - [24]
 

You said it yourself Mars, you can't have everyone in the same place and happy. With two shards, there will be a breif lull in the complaints before they start back up again.

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.21 02:53:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Mars Theran on 21/06/2011 02:53:52
Originally by: RZM25
You said it yourself Mars, you can't have everyone in the same place and happy. With two shards, there will be a breif lull in the complaints before they start back up again.


Quite possibly, but at least it would take a couple years Laughing

Seriously though, the changes to Aggression mechanics and allowances for Highsec to directly counter Lowsec and open up a more versatile form of PvP might help things. Many Pirates are pirates because they want to PvP without being in Blobs in Null or being subject to the big alliances. Station games are dull for the most part, and that leaves Lowsec and Wardec's for the most part.

Of course, there are groups like RvB, but that is limited to those two corporations and those like them. So really, the options are limited, and when you get in with a group of hardcore gankers with FC's cursing and shouting all the time, plus ship losses and ISK from kills as a limited resource, it becomes more viable to gank the helpless than actually take risks.

Yet, somehow, corps like RvB seem to do it, and that may have to do with that they collect the loot and salvage for recycling. Honestly think High vs Low would work well in many respects, open up opportunities for RP for some players, and generally create a more dynamic and healthy PvP system.

Currently, there's lots of problems and not much fix.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only