open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New dev blog: Nullsec Development: Rules and Guidelines
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (22)

Author Topic

Edwardius
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:21:00 - [331]
 

Originally by: Enuen Ravenseye
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I'm still yet to be convinced about dynamic resources. We generally want players to claim space, settle down, develop it etc, and if doing so means their space becomes worthless, what's the point? Specifically with the "random moon movement" thing, I'd also be concerned that some little corp will have claimed a dead-end constellation in the middle of nowhere and developed it, only to have a major moon appear, followed by a big alliance who turfs them out to get at the moon.


So having a small group claim a good resource, even if only for a short time, is BAD thing ... but providing a constant ISK fountain to the mega-alliances is a GOOD thing? Gotcha. You wouldn't want to mess with the Russian mafia's income stream, now would you?

I would prefer to see dynamic resources (ffs, if SWG could pull it off, I would think EVE could) and a move away from any "automated process". A move to MoonPI would at least be a compromise I suppose. Then the smaller groups could get a leg up on T2 production without having to spend billions a month on POSes, assuming they can even get access to any decent moons. Though having some process for interrupting MoonPI would still be necessary (to replace the ability to destroy moon-mining POSes).



I would want eve to be as real as possible, moons switching resources is just plain stupid. Einstein would not even want to try to look for a physics law that would explain such behaviour

GRIEV3R
Gallente
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:22:00 - [332]
 

Edited by: GRIEV3R on 04/08/2011 15:44:11
Structures:
As a supercap pilot, I don't think shooting structures with millions of EHP is boring or problematic at all. I was SHOCKED the first time I joined a superblob and bashed some sov structures at just how fast they die when you have 150 supers shooting them.
sub point one: I don't think superblobs are going to go away. It just makes too much sense to use supers in a blob. They are so expensive and yet so helpless when fielded in small numbers - anybody with a hictor and a fleet of battleships can lock you down. I don't want to lose my nyx to some little gang of noobs in drakes - I want to lose it to an epic fleet of titans raping my face with doomsdays.
sub point two: sov structures are really only going to be attacked by capships anyway. If you reduce their HP to a point that it's practical for subcaps to shoot them, there's no point in fielding caps or supers to do it, and suddenly one of the biggest roles for supers is gone.
Conclusion:
option 1: increase sov structure HP by a factor of 100. Because seriously, if they're going to get smashed by 150 or 200 supers, they should have the HP to match that kind of firepower. Maybe if sov structures didn't melt in 2 minutes, the defenders would make more of an effort of defending them.
option 2: keep sov structure HP right where it's at, but make dreads the only capship in the game that can attack them. This will take away that role from supers that I mentioned above, but that's not necessarily a bad thing because it provide a reason for dreads to exist again.

Ratting in 0.0:
problem 1: The sanctums nerf sucks, bro. I think it's never a bad thing for everyone to be able to make a lot of money in 0.0. If you're active and you join fleets to defend your space, you're going to lose ships. Being able to quickly make isk to replace your ships is critical to morale. If replacing your losses is so tedious and demoralizing that it makes you want to just not log in for a couple weeks, why not just have an alt running lvl 4's in empire? I don't want to switch over to my alt and run lvl 4s by myself; I want to play my main who is awesome and has lots of SP, and group up with my friends in nullsec and make lots of money in a short amount of time, while also being logged on and active and ready to jump into pvp ships and defend our space if needed.
problem 2: group ratting with your buddies is really fun. Solo grinding anoms all day in a Thanatos is not fun at all.
Idea #1: just bring back sanctums they way they used to be
Idea #2: this is only a rough concept, but what if there was a way to use incursion-style encounters for nullsec anomalies? Incursions are too difficult for one person to solo (only because you can't use caps, though) but lucrative enough to incentivize group play. It's actually worth some newbie's time to go web & target paint stuff, and it's worth some uber guy's time to have a newbie in a frigate helping him. It's also worth the time for a player to be a dedicated salvager. What if nullsec anomalies were protected behind acceleration gates that lock out caps, and the rats found therein (whatever faction they hail from) used the Sleeper/Incursion AI?

Edit
P.S. Thank you CCP for making this dev blog and taking time to listen to player feedback on this. Even if a lot of popular ideas end up not getting implemented, it still means a lot to us that you at least took the time to listen to what we want and hear our ideas on issues that are both complex and nuanced, and which also aren't necessarily as clear from a dev point of view as from a player one.
:hats off to CCP:

E man Industries
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:23:00 - [333]
 

Wow blue's

I must say this is really nice and reading this has re-energized some of my excitment for EvE.
this feedback is great.

Eduardo'o
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:26:00 - [334]
 

Originally by: johnny RycKo
5 years!

So funny! Is there a lack of coders at ccp? maybe they are coding dust or WoD!

Honestly 5 years to tweek the nul sec...

Tyrannis launched in 3 times over 3month (or like that)

Incarna Solo add-on with only one CQ, with nothing improving the game, And one ship reskin!!!



Damn what's wrong! fix the bug/issues that we have for a long time (the log in mechanism is crap and boring...), and make a real extension... I'm sorry but 00 tweek, it's just a patch not a real extension.

I really find great that the community can give his opinions, that's awesome, but please give to the player some great stuff!



Another bitter vet. What is wrong with having long-term plans, what is wrong with setting goals hard to reach. Short term thinking only leads to quick fixes that end up in issues a bit later again.
If CCP does not communicate the bitter vets shout and cry, and if they communicate upfront, the bitter vets shout and cry even harder.

Medidranda Livoga
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:42:00 - [335]
 

Lots of words but actions will be missing for a long while it seems. No incentive to pay & play until you accomplish many of the things you are talking about in this blog.

Guntact
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:44:00 - [336]
 

Edited by: Guntact on 04/08/2011 15:45:40
I am not clear on how ISK/hr tiers from Empire to Null-sec. It seems like ISK/hr making is currently balanced across all security areas where I can make close to the same isk per hour anywhere in EVE, but I would expect there to be some ratio of improvement from Empire to Null-sec. Right now null tends to import more than it exports (e.g., Mexallon?). Please fix Mexallon yields!

Other note: I did like the post about considering the tools from Planetside. That was hella fun!

How about we get to the basics of Supply/Demand? How about we severely limit resources in empire/low-sec and boost exports from null-sec. This could be accomplished by the following ideas:
1. Ice exclusive to null-sec
2. Drops would not produce any high level minerals
3. Incurions produce a max isk/hr that is tiered from empire to the abo****e best ratio in null-sec
4. Create different currencies between Null/low/empire as if they were countries in the world with real exchange rates. That would put more emphasis on imports/exports and trade/treaty agreements.
5. Create a demolition ship whose sole purpose is to be the only tool for the destruction of outposts. Fleets kill the shield, then the demo ship comes in, deploys, and does the destruction it was disigned to do. The demo ship when deployed would not be an afk monster, rather a ship that must be managed and it uses fuel. As the ship took down the outpost imagine space debris flying through space.

Midnight Hope
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:44:00 - [337]
 

I would suggest you do just the "The functional role of Nullsec" exercise for low/high/WH space *now* to determine where these areas overlap in terms of roles or what each area has that is unique to them.

It would be a bad thing to discover a year from now that the functional role you define for Null sec turned out to be the same for low sec or w-space or empire (or so similar that people would rather stay in empire). :P

EaSy LouiSe
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:49:00 - [338]
 

Edited by: EaSy LouiSe on 04/08/2011 15:50:36
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: EnderCapitalG
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: VaL Iscariot
"Nullsec features and content should always remind players why they left safe space, and never make them think about going back"

Was this considered when you applied the Nerf-Bat to half of null sec with the whole system security thing? No Havens or Sanctums in any system with a security above -.25? A few losses in and I was broke with no real income source beyond my market toon. That only goes so far, as one needs gold to breed gold. I made decent isk running the forsaken sites because they have a high chance to spawn a faction rat, but it didn't take long for others to realize this too and my income stream was terminated. Thus I went back to high sec/low sec to grind missions, and run tasty Radar sites. That was 6 months ago, and have I've not even considered going 'back' to null sec: The Land of Boredom. Go team.


Nullsec isn't guaranteed to make everyone happy. If you like empire better, that's life.


Except in the current state of the game there's almost no reason to not live in Empire, especially after the recent Agent buffs compared to all of the nullsec nerfs that were put in before you decided to buff nullsec in six months.


I completely disagree. There's less safety but also higher profits. As mentioned though, it doesn't cater to anyone. If you want to run level 4s in Motsu over anomalies, that's certainly your choice.


The problem with Havens/Sanctums was never that they were able to be had equally as much anywhere despite truesec fella. The problem with Haven/Sanctums is just as it always was... they make the rich richer while providing not much at all for the average little person. Reason being that they are either botted constantly by fellas in Tengus or are wtfsteamrolled by people in supercaps that already have the isk and are just using them to farm more isk for more supercaps.

Zyrbalax III
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:50:00 - [339]
 

Best post of the thread IMO: +1,000,000.

I love this vision of player-built empires. CCP please take note and consider carefully.

Originally by: Aerissa Nolen
Edited by: Aerissa Nolen on 03/08/2011 17:18:54
The two big issues I think CCP needs to change with nullsec are:

1) Sov mechanics encourage everyone to blow up everything, because there is no strategic benefit to leaving some structures unharmed. This is not how real war works.
2) Income generation for alliances tends to make them want to EXCLUDE neutrals from visiting their nullsec space, because they are simply seen as competition for limited resources (mining, rats, etc). This is not how real trade works.

In a sense, nullsec is exactly the opposite of empire space, when instead it should really be just like empire space, except with alliances able to fulfill the role of empires.

Change nullsec infrastructure to have lasting value... make new infrastructure something that, with invested time/effort, allows for better passive income generation, but only when used by lots of people.

It should take months or years for certain pieces of this infrastructure to reach full potential. The potential passive income should dwarf the naturally imbalanced income sources (rats/resources/moon goo), but only when sufficiently built up AND only when it is used by more people; alliances should WANT neutrals coming into their territory to increase passive income.

....

* Alliances should have to build jumpgates; a system should start out accessible only by jump-capable fleets, which alliances have to secure and build stargates to promote travel....

* NPC colonies should setup on planets when alliance space is secure enough with stargates open, and of course alliances can tax these colonies. Colony growth should partly depend on NPC convoys traveling to empire, encouraging alliances to protect not only the colonies but the trade routes.....

* When a colony is sufficiently developed, it should create NPC stations just like in Empire, with high value agent missions and excellent ratio trade goods, more attractive than what's available in empire. All of this is of course taxed by the alliance, and the more neutrals that use it, the more passive income the alliance gets....

The net result of this is that an alliance in nullsec should be able to create a lasting empire that people want to travel to for profit....

The key point being, of course, that none of this is required. An alliance should not have to look like an empire if they don't want; they can leave their space unconnected by jumpgates, hard to access, NBSI lawless, and recluse. They won't make as much money as their empire-mimicing counterparts, but they may have other advantages.

Post #113 - well worth reading the (full) original.

Z3

gfldex
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:53:00 - [340]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
"fly to the next region over vs fly to Jita"


And it should not be a single player game. Right now industry in 0.0 looks like the following:

1. log JF alt in (alt == single player)
2. log cyno alt in (alt == single player)
3. check local for cyno alt
4. if local is all blue (single player!) undock and light cyno
5. go back to step 2

That used to be different. Freighter escorts where common (I used to call Paragon home) and a real pain in the rear. A trip that would take 45min was blown up to 3h. Thank you very much. But it was not single player.

Fast forward to titan bridges. Now the game changed from a multi player game to a 2 player game. Technically a Titan should need a support fleet. But since jump drives move ships in an instance and you need a cyno alt (single player!) in the target system anyway, all you need to do is to check local before you light you cyno.

JF where another step that changed to 2 player game to single player.

How about the following wild idea? Your POS network is your industry backbone in 0.0 .

Lets introduce a POS mod (Adding stuff to the game is good, right?) that we shall call Hyperspace Accelerator. It will have quite some room for cargo and launch a unpiloted space craft that has much less room for cargo. It will launch that space craft and sling it to the next POS in the same system or elsewhere in range _unless_ some mean attacker drops a bubble in the flight path. If the vessel is detroyed you have a chance to get the stuff, if it isnt, it will head back to the POS and try again. If that happens the POS will start to alert the POS owner via a text message in corp chat. The whole process is (semi) automatic but interfereable.

You could move stuff around via your POS network without the need of JBs (that have no reason to be close to a POS anyways) and give small groups of attackers a reason to punish players that choose to be an afk alliance. JFs are still useful to reach beyond your POS network. It might be a good idea to limit what stuff you can move with them little space vessels.

Moon goo should move toward a POS in a seamingly _interceptable_ way. If you don't intend to protect your stuff, you should not have it.

As a side effect alliance leaders would have good reason to have their space populated and having raiding parties on a regular bases into hostile space (return of the mercs?).

POSes should be able to build ships much faster then stations (we can't have that in higsec because of space pollution regulation). An invasion should involve forward logistic operations that go beyond slinging freighters around. And a POS, as a steaming monster of epic industrial proportions, should support that.

If you let players nick moon goo, you will need some way to increase moon goo output. How about letting moon harvesters burn it's own fuel. You can then allow more the one harvester for the same moon goo type because fuel consumption on all harvesters at the POS will double (or even triple).

You have a lot of work to do folks. :)

Lady Zarrina
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:53:00 - [341]
 

One Empire Carebear's view.

With null sec controlling moon goo, they indirectly control T2 production, which is a significant portion of the economy. Now the fact that more production gets done in empire space.... DUH. Only makes sense to set up production in a stable environment. How many companies do you know that actively seek out war zones for locations to place their factories. I know many do not want empire to have any perceived advantage, but it is common sense. Plus, needing logisitics/transportation is a good thing. And what's up with needing more Trit 0.0? Life in null sec can be hard, (and guess what, it should be hard) but it sounds like they are starting to whine. They want easy access to everything. You want "easy" move to empire (ducks) hehehehe. I would think you want bottlenecks to building these sup caps, as everyone is complaining their are too strong and common place.

Is one of the worries that the big alliances just set up shop in the best sections of space with no worries of attack? Then they start massive supercap production chains? So they are trying to make it easier for smaller alliances to get supercap production going? Well as long as there are "Best" areas of space and endless resources in static areas, this is going to happen. The rich get richer, the strong get stronger. Just have to wait until boredom or greed starts to erode them from within.

Overall though, I would think resources need to deplete (slowly, months and years, not days and weeks) and owning more space than you need should be very very costly. Perhaps this would spawn pockets of unowned space. Perhaps there are NPC uprisings in these unowned pockets. These uprising spawn opportunities and resources? Perhaps you want to encourage there being unowned space as well as owned space?. Would this work in practice, would alliances figure out a way to "work" the system. I don't know, probably. But I am sure CCP could devise a few tricks.


Now individual pilots in 0.0 should be able to create more ISK/hour than folks in Empire. Only stands to reason, they are losing more ships, implants, etc. Generally, their risks are higher and their costs are potentially higher. It should not be outrageously more, say 50% on average? And the more contested the space the more rewarding the activity should be. That will increase activity which seems to be a desired goal of Eve.

Sessym
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.04 15:58:00 - [342]
 

So many dev responses makes community panda a happy panda Wink
I think I might ad my two cents as well.

The current sov mechanic distingguishes levels of sovereignity by time elapsed. Essentially the longer you preserve your rule over a system, the more awesome it can get. That is hindering the deployment of smaller organizations because by the time they could have the necessary measures to properly defend their system from a capital attack, any larger alliance can take easily over.

A valid approach for improvement would be to make space more configurable and defendable based on the effort and resources that go into it. With a well-balanced scaling, this means that smaller entities would have a chance to defend their assets with good tactics.

In the end I imagine space empires where you have 'perimeter' area that is monitored and used only on an occasional basis, and provides a buffer area so that the holder can receive a warning of any suspicious activity (with due organization of course).

Then you would have the regularly used areas with appropriate infrastructure and relatively good safety measures (as long as the perimeter is not penetrated successfully by an enemy squad). It is relatively easy to harass the residents here, though the profits and the rewards of small-scale cooperation should lure people out from the core systems.

The third category of systems are the high fortresses of every pixel empire, where the infrastructure is incredibly dense, industry and trade is thriving and response to an incursion can be organized on a very short notice. Taking these fortresses should be a real tactical challenge and these are the systems where massive encounters and meticulous planning would grant their rewards.

In essence, I imagine a sov system that builds up infrastructure and defenses based on how well organized and active the alliance as a whole is, and where massive conquest should take planning and effort, while occasional encounters are easy to come by and could net good rewards for the brave and bold. It also should sport mechanics that encourage behaviours rather than force them.

Jack Haydn
Valar Morghulis.
Get Off My Lawn
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:09:00 - [343]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Dominick Owusu
Edited by: Dominick Owusu on 03/08/2011 19:58:06
But even a simple client side animation with random stars going by that lasts for a period dictated by the distance traveled would work as a starting point.


This is a really good point.


Oh god, no, please not! Travelling through space already is boring and tedious enough, if I now was forced to sit back on EVERY jump and wait for a completely useless animation to pass by, I'd prolly throw my monitor out of the window at some point.

gfldex
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:17:00 - [344]
 

Originally by: Warwars
Possibly splitting reward among all in the kill mail evenly might promote more small scale fights as well. Although this leave out the poor logis so it still isn't a complete idea but well worth thinking about at least.


Easy, split the money between pilots in fleet. Scouts would get their share too.

Selnix
Gallente
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:22:00 - [345]
 

Please remember that any boost to 0.0 industry which is aimed at bringing an end to everyone exporting from Jita will potentially lead to 0.0 production firms undercutting empire producers and selling their wares in Jita all the same. Without finding some way to make space bigger or make it unfeasible to transfer product in bulk either direction you can not easily isolate one from the other.

Swearte Widfarend
Gallente
Aurora Security
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:24:00 - [346]
 

The question came up in #tweetfleet today:
Quote:
What about NPC nullsec (I'm going to include the NPC constellations as well here)?


Sure Sovereign Nullsec is the "endgame" but barring a small miracle you won't have a system there that allows smaller entities a place to train and grow there. NPC Nullsec is sort of that training ground, but has been just as abandoned as Losec (is that because it isn't broken?).

I think a couple things are broken - like broken Truesec areas, and the strange grouping of stations in various nullsec regions. What logic is there in one constellation having, say 9 stations but not covering all basic services across those 9? Entering the scary world of RP/Logic, it would make sense to have all services covered through a constellation. It would also make sense for stations to be in "good" systems of a constellation, since (frankly) the NPCs should be smart enough to deploy their stations in useful systems (like having manufacturing facilities in a system with a lot of belts).

I'd like Team BFF to at least think about the role NPC nullsec should play, as a transition between Empire/Losec and Sovereign Nullsec.

Oh, and Outposts.

  1. make them destructible. Malcanis had a great plan for this, based on a lot of other plans and player input.

  2. Allow the option for more than 1 per system, maybe based on system size...

  3. did I mention make them destructible? They are cheaper than a Titan to construct, and painfully permanent



Balthasar Moreq
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:25:00 - [347]
 

I see allot of fine words in that blog, but they are just that, words. Remember we are only interested in what P does, not what the say eh Hilmar?

Timescales for the proposed fixes range from this year (maybe), to five years to never, so typical P 'big vision' puff peice. The most interesting quote (to paraphrase) is that 'we won't do stuff casue its awesome', somebody want to run that by Hilmar and co? Thats all I've ever heard from the red headed one since I started playing EVE in 2006 was 'blah, blah, EVE is awesome, we are awesome, our stuff is awesome blah, blah, ad naseum.'

P can make time to add new Sparkles to the Arum shop but can't make time to re-skin any more ships, and they expect to devote enough time and effort to revitalise 0.0. (given that the majority of P don't even work on EVE anymore) with their track record I'd expect them to break it even worse than it allready is.

Tammarr
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:32:00 - [348]
 

Originally by: Swearte Widfarend
The question came up in #tweetfleet today:
Quote:
What about NPC nullsec (I'm going to include the NPC constellations as well here)?

Oh, and Outposts.

  1. make them destructible. Malcanis had a great plan for this, based on a lot of other plans and player input.

  2. Allow the option for more than 1 per system, maybe based on system size...

  3. did I mention make them destructible? They are cheaper than a Titan to construct, and painfully permanent





nullsec was interesting, risky, brilliant, tempering, poding someone meant they went back many jumps unless you were actually sieging their home system that possibly had a station in it. then the dark ages came, with stations appearing faster then moles can chew through your average carrot farm. blow a ship up, pod someone, 3-4 minutes later they are back. god you don't own a station, I must leave my ships here at this pos where god knows who can take them?
eve was harsh, nullsec was interesting, the trust required was tremendous. make todays nullers live a week out of pos and 85% will go back home to mommy because they are breed weak today. +1 for outposts going boom.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:34:00 - [349]
 

Two of the guidelines are that player interests should align with leader interests, and that there should be a reason for any player to want to go to null.

I think this should apply to those players who enjoy being pure industrialists. Right now if a pure industrialist was in a null alliance and a CTA came along, he would log, which means he would not be in the null alliance for long, or at all.

There needs to be a reason for alliance leaders to want pure industrialists in their alliance. The only thing I can think of is make it hard to haul in freighter loads of 1400mm guns from Jita (for those who do not know, 2 such loads reprocessed contain all the minerals for a supercarrier).

Also the worst part of null should be better for making ISK than any part of high sec. The anomaly nerf was fine in that it made different space different, it was bad in that it made large parts of null worse than high sec.

For example: there are many that enjoy ratting and anomalies. They should be inclined to go to null to make isk, and be able to make more isk than in high sec, despite high alliance taxes. Those high taxes would then be used to fund the PvP group so they do not need to do what they hate (isk grinding). But for this to work even for a small alliance in a backwater, all of null needs to be better than high sec for isk making.

gfldex
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:37:00 - [350]
 

Originally by: Guntact
I am not clear on how ISK/hr tiers from Empire to Null-sec.


I'm most likely going to be burned for this, but **** it. Empire is right now the best place to make ISK. If I run incursions and get the fleet together I want to have, I _maintain_ 120MISK/h. I have no reds or CTAs to interrupt me, that's what maintain means. On top of that I make another 20ish M/h with concord LP. (that is quickly dropping now)

If you would get me more well skilled pilots (it's paladins and paladins and some more paladins) to run the bigger sites, I could maintain 140MISK/h.

Incursions is high SP content if you look for ISK. Your trusty old Drake wont even make you halve that much. You need to bring loads of dps (real dps, not EFT dps). If you can bring that you laugh about anything else.

The best I heard so far is 1BISK (not taking LP into account) in one day, done by a guardian pilot. Most of that ISK goes into the char bazaar and SC funds. **** moon goo, **** sanctums, **** officer spawns. Incursions are the way forward. Your sanctum was nerfed? **** you, I will stay in empire anyways.

Nevigrofnu Egar
Posted - 2011.08.04 16:56:00 - [351]
 

I could be here writing a huge wall of text about what is wrong with 0.0. I thing that most of the people already talked about almost all of the problems in 0.0 and propose several solutions, I just want to take this opportunity to talk about a problem that is very close to my heart.

0.0 PVP solo/small gang guys that only have 1-2 hours to play Eve a day, have a extremely difficult time to make money so they can buy ships to go blow up.

I basically go for the entire week making money, doing stupid stuff I don't like, to make money, just so I can do something in the weekend I like -> Blow up ships!

Why can't we do pvp and make money doing it?

Give us a chance to make money doing pvp in 0.0. I do not want to be rich or make a ton of isk doing pvp, just the minimum to pay a new ship, put some modules and pay the insurance, no more no less.

For example, why not create a PVP Bounty for each player living in 0.0?

If I kill someone Concord puts a bounty on my head. If someone kills me, it collects the bounty I have on my head. Simple and gives people some income just for doing pvp in 0.0.

---

Exploring this idea further, just some rules to make this work properly and to avoid scams:

Collection of Bounties:

- The PVP bounty is collected by players that kill my ship, not my pod.
- If several players kill me, the bounty is divided by all in equal amounts
- The bounty can only be collected by non blue players (to avoid fraud)
- Independent of the value of the bounty I have in my head, the bounty collected cannot be superior to the value of my ship hull (to avoid fraud), the rest of the bounty remains in my head for a future kill
- The bounty is only paid if the kill happens in 0.0 space

Placement of Bounties:

- Concord puts a bounty in the my head if I kill a ship (because I'm a mean person)
- The bounty value is a small % of the ship hull value
- If several people entered in the kill, this bounty value will be divided by all in equal amounts
- To spice things up, a % of any insurance we make in 0.0 is put by Concord in our head (in 0.0 nobody is safe and must be a target, this will help you get target even if you run from pvp)

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:22:00 - [352]
 

Edited by: Gnulpie on 04/08/2011 17:28:51
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Ilijk Mijself
Ok here are my thoughts. Right now there is very little content for groups in 0.0 even in upgraded systems.

I would like to see anomalies dynamically changing depending on how many ships show up in them. Something like this: If you do it alone: everything stays as it is. If you do it with x people you get y more waves of rats and every wave contains z more rats to shoot at.


This is something we're looking into very hard.


No, no, no!

Please not. This is a horrible, ugly idea. Completely artificial and immersion breaking.

Also: go away from themepart content! Exactly that sort of thing and thinking got you into trouble the first time.

Give players the TOOLS to do good stuff. The rest will all follow.


For example: Allow for taxation of a system or constellation. And do it finely graned that you can tax (or lift taxes for) specific corps/alliances. Also allow general taxes based on standings.

Another example: Do 'incursions' for the pirate factions. If such an pirate-faction incursion isn't beaten back, the space will turn into faction 0.0. Of course you need a mechanism how players could capture back faction 0.0. You already have the incursion system in place, you "only" need to copy and adjust it. Also those fights would be meaningful instead of grinding anomalies for the n-th time.


Just think that every action should have a meaningful impact on EVE. Focus more on that. More spawn waves at anomalies when you warp in more people is completely non-meaningful and counter-intuitive. Please don't go down that road.


Edit:

And a big

thank you

to Team BFF and CCP Greyscale in special for reading through all the posts, taking them serious and providing lots of discussion and answers.

tenmei rho
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:24:00 - [353]
 

Changing local chat would be nice, not just removing it completely.

By default, make local blank like w-space. Sov holder has the option, once they reach a certain sov level, to add an upgrade to the iHub (or whatever replaces iHub if they are removed) which lets sov holder (and only sov holder) see local like normal. Everyone else would still have w-space type local.

I think this would encourage more small gang stuff as groups could roam through low-population areas and actually find targets, instead of having them safe/dock up immediately when one neut/red pops in. Valuable/strategically important systems would remain safer as in theory the sov holder would upgrade those to give themselves intel. Also, would help reduce bots.

Bots would also become easier to catch/kill unless botters spent time/effort/isk upgrading every system they use. Should also decrease the impact of RMT as they wouldn't have as much safety for their bots to generate isk to sell.

This might also make it easier for small groups to gain a foothold in low-population areas as without a presence there, since the "controlling" group wouldn't know others had moved in without keeping a presence there at all times.

Bonus to industry/market as more stuff should asplode since you'd know a lot less about what you were jumping into. Also might reduce big lagfests to some degree as you wouldn't want to welp a big fleet into the unknown unless it was for a very important target and/or well scouted.

gfldex
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:28:00 - [354]
 

Originally by: Nevigrofnu Egar

I basically go for the entire week making money, doing stupid stuff I don't like, to make money,


That's why ISK got a value.

Originally by: Nevigrofnu Egar

Why can't we do pvp and make money doing it?



Because PvP is the alternative to printing ISK.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.04 17:37:00 - [355]
 

Originally by: johnny RycKo
5 years!

So funny! Is there a lack of coders at ccp? maybe they are coding dust or WoD!

Honestly 5 years to tweek the nul sec...

Tyrannis launched in 3 times over 3month (or like that)

Incarna Solo add-on with only one CQ, with nothing improving the game, And one ship reskin!!!



Damn what's wrong! fix the bug/issues that we have for a long time (the log in mechanism is crap and boring...), and make a real extension... I'm sorry but 00 tweek, it's just a patch not a real extension.

I really find great that the community can give his opinions, that's awesome, but please give to the player some great stuff!



When you see the next blog you should hopefully understand where the "5 years" stuff comes from. There is a lot of stuff to do there (complete rework of all exploration content, for example), and there's no way in hell we're getting it all done any time soon. There will be reasonably substantial changes happening this winter, but the overall plan is necessarily an ongoing process.

Originally by: Jack Haydn
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Dominick Owusu
Edited by: Dominick Owusu on 03/08/2011 19:58:06
But even a simple client side animation with random stars going by that lasts for a period dictated by the distance traveled would work as a starting point.


This is a really good point.


Oh god, no, please not! Travelling through space already is boring and tedious enough, if I now was forced to sit back on EVERY jump and wait for a completely useless animation to pass by, I'd prolly throw my monitor out of the window at some point.


And obviously that's one of the things that we'd be considering if we looked at making significant changes in this direction. We're not planning on just implementing that blind, but it doesn't stop the underlying reasoning being a good point Smile

Originally by: Swearte Widfarend
The question came up in #tweetfleet today:
Quote:
What about NPC nullsec (I'm going to include the NPC constellations as well here)?




This blog applies to all (non-w-space) nullsec, including NPC nullsec. Specific goals for NPC nullsec, along with all other major design areas, are what the next blog is for Smile

Originally by: Gnulpie
Edited by: Gnulpie on 04/08/2011 17:28:51
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Ilijk Mijself
Ok here are my thoughts. Right now there is very little content for groups in 0.0 even in upgraded systems.

I would like to see anomalies dynamically changing depending on how many ships show up in them. Something like this: If you do it alone: everything stays as it is. If you do it with x people you get y more waves of rats and every wave contains z more rats to shoot at.


This is something we're looking into very hard.


No, no, no!

Please not. This is a horrible, ugly idea. Completely artificial and immersion breaking.



Can you explain your reasoning here further? This isn't a reaction I was expecting.

To be clear, what we're talking about is something along the lines of "the Guristas have noticed that they're outgunned and called for reinforcements", with additional NPCs showing up to balance the field. This allows us to scale content easily and ensure that having your friends come play with you doesn't mean everyone's making less money.

islador
Gallente
Frontier Explorer's League
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:42:00 - [356]
 

I love that this is getting more attention again :) *hugs CCP*

The only thing I think you missed:
Content requiring large scale organization and commitment will only be attempted by large groups when there is sufficient return, FW has little reward and impact on the game, thus low to no participation.
- Example: Gallente FW CTAs are 30-40 man fleets while nullsec CTAs are 300-1,000 man fleets.

You seem to have covered everything else, and if this level of quality and scope continues, I look forward to your next patch cycle. Be sure to keep us informed and point out where your patches and dev blogs tie into this one.

Farrellus Cameron
Sturmgrenadier Inc
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:42:00 - [357]
 

The first thing I think is important is creating additional incentives for PvP that do not just involve taking sov. Right now, you can roam around for some random kills, but often people will just dock up and wait for you to leave - or wait till they have twice your number before engaging.

I think you can tie this issue into the issue of isk generation in 0.0 by creating a system wherein people can raid and plunder each other's space without necessarily getting in a sov battle. Create some system where players can attack certain structures and then reap rewards from doing that - like having the structure drop components that can then be sold for isk, or something along those lines.

Kirkland Langue
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:43:00 - [358]
 

Originally by: Edwardius
I would want eve to be as real as possible, moons switching resources is just plain stupid. Einstein would not even want to try to look for a physics law that would explain such behaviour


The resources are already there - but deposits haven't been found. You are not looking for solid chunks of some material - you are looking for molecule sized bits that are mixed into a mess of other rocks - even futuristic scans may miss finding areas that have enough density to be "mined" on a first pass. And, of course, when that specific location has been depleted - the resource dries up.

Heck, it's a better answer than trying to explain mining via orbital laser beams anyways. This does not mean that I support Dynamic Moon mineral relocation. In fact, I oppose it because rare minerals are better suited for strategic value than individual wealth creation tools. If CCP created a MoonPI system, then it might be fine to have dynamic resources...

Magnus Veyr
Posted - 2011.08.04 17:58:00 - [359]
 

This... is an AWESOME blog!

I bet if you had published this before all the uhm "issues" lately the reaction of a large portion of the players would have been different.

Having said that; I miss something about smaller entities having a chance, being able to carve out their small part rather than having to side with one of the superblobs. This is ofcourse partially a jump/titan bridge problem (large entities can devour large areas because of their area of influence using bridging), seeing those options removed (JBs) and severely restricted (Titan bridging) would help a lot.

Still I do think there should be more emphasis on smaller groups being able to actually achieve something in 0.0, other than the hit&run stuff we've been seeing over the years. Do you guys have any vision or ideas on this?

Viceroy
Posted - 2011.08.04 18:03:00 - [360]
 

Originally by: "CCP Greyscale"
This allows us to scale content easily and ensure that having your friends come play with you doesn't mean everyone's making less money.


The problem with 0.0 isn't that people aren't making enough money, or that the -already ridiculous- ISK taps aren't scaling to accommodate more people drinking from them.

The biggest problem with 0.0 is high-sec.

The more you ignore this, the more time you're going to waste wondering why all the content you keep adding doesn't work as it's intended. It's because it all depends on there not being a comfortable alternative that provides almost everything that you promise, with none of the associated dangers or risks.

You're a scruffy looking middle aged man trying to lure people into his suspicious looking truck by advertising delicious candy, and when they don't come, you assume it's because the candy isn't delicious enough. It should also occur to you that your candy truck is parked right next to an ice cream factory run by SWAT officers who enjoy handing out free ice cream to everyone who can ask for it.


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (22)

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