open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: PvE
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic

SuperBeastie
Caldari
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:57:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Dierdra Vaal
Quote:
Best loot
* The best loot in the game should come from nullsec. High-end loot's enforced rarity gives a strong "jackpot" moment and tends towards extremely high values, and nullsec should be where you go to get high-value payouts.


While I understand the desire to make nullsec very attractive, there's still the case that many 0.0 systems (especially the ones inside settled space) are much safer than low sec systems - yet their rewards will be higher. This does not seem to fit the 'reward scales with risk' mantra that pervades eve's game design.

While this will no doubt make nullsec more attractive, does this design approach not risk depriving other areas of the game from attributes they need to be attractive (in a specific case: low sec)?


Nullsec systems tend to be safe on a minute-to-minute basis because people have invested considerable time and resources in making them that way, and I don't have a huge problem with that (so long as it's not producing game-breaking amounts of income). If you want to bring risk into it, consider the strategic-level risk involved in securing that space in the first place Smile




(And to everyone else, we already made sure that the best agents weren't in hisec when we introduced level 5s. This is not a "level 3 only in hisec" thing, don't worry. We're fully aware that some people will never move, and we're OK with that.)


As for the safety in 0.0 anyone who actually lives out here will be able to tell you ratting here is about the most unsafe thing to do. every system above -0.6 has a afk cloaky hot dropping alt (at least in the region of fountain). The cloaky hot droppers no longer even need to waste a high slot on probe launchers due to the uber buffed onboard scanner. I have not used my carrier to rat since before that change. While this was intended to make life out here easier it had quite the opposite effect.

Recently the corp I'm in lost a good portion of its members to highsec mission running because you can make similar isk with little to no risk and you can use the awesome ships that no one flys in 0.0

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:58:00 - [62]
 

Make all plexes do (close to) omni damage and target switching NPCs (but be a bit nice towards the drones). Then you at least can do them in something alot closer to pvp setups and give people a fighting chance against pvp'ers, which means you do not actually have to run to a station if any red passes by.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.16 13:59:00 - [63]
 

but omni damage anoms would make 0.0 more generic and samey i think they reallywant it more diverse and interesting

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.16 14:35:00 - [64]
 

Originally by: Plyn
I am concerned about a contradiction between something mentioned in the Industry section and the PvE section.

From the industry section:
Quote:
Geared towards T2

Our current proposal is that hisec is for volume T1 goods, lowsec will be for meta/faction gear eventually, nullsec is for T2, and wormholes are for T3.


From the PvE section:
Quote:
Best loot

The best loot in the game should come from nullsec. High-end loot's enforced rarity gives a strong "jackpot" moment and tends towards extremely high values, and nullsec should be where you go to get high-value payouts.


Lots of faction loot is better than T2 loot, and even more so when it comes to farming/selling it for iskies. I'm not opposed to moving a lot of the faction stuff to low sec to encourage more people to move there, but the faction loot picked up from plexes/special spawns (dark blood, shadow serpentis, domination, etc.) is some players real source of going from "breaking even" to "making progress".

Can we get some clarification as to how these two bullet points are meant to work/not work with each other?


The Industry one is talking specifically about manufacturing (and research), while the PvE is talking specifically about loot drops. Faction gear can't currently be manufactured so that's a moot point, but if we change that then these two points end up working together quite nicely, and encouraging more trade into the bargain.

Originally by: Hwong Jian
Profitability
[...]
Loot
[...]



Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.

And "tags and ammo" is a PITA, you'll get no argument from me about that Smile

Abdiel Kavash
Caldari
Paladin Order
Fidelas Constans
Posted - 2011.08.16 14:46:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


Just curious, why the decision to remove the few anomalies which were on par income-wise with level 4 missions from most of nullsec a few months back then? Pre-nerf, I felt that nullsec PvE was just right on the risk/reward scale. Now - I couldn't be bothered, and neither could most of my corp.

Plyn
Posted - 2011.08.16 17:08:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Xython
...
4. Ok, don't Nerf Highsec Missions, but give us more Nullsec Missions. There's hardly any places to mission in Nullsec, and universally those places are deathtraps due to roaming **** gangs. Why can't I warp to a Sanctum and decide to talk to the guy in charge, ask him if there's anything he needs doing, instead of just blowing them away? Why can't I happen upon a bunch of Amarr Missionaries in deep space, looking for spare parts to fix a ship? This could all be bridged into the current Anomaly system -- instead of just Cosmic Signatures, "Distress Beacon," "CONCORD Broadcast," "Signs of Battle", etc etc could all pop up.

This could be dynamic, as well. Say I have bad Amarr faction. Maybe instead of helping the Missionaries, I could decide to blow them away. Yes, I'd take a faction hit with Amarr, but my character already has bad faction, so who cares?
...
Emphasis added.

This is a fantastic idea. I know it would take a ton of extra coding, but honestly this would make PvE a lot more interesting. This also adds immersion, it adds player decision, and it ties into the exploration design goals.

+100 from me, Xython, bravo!

Tza Omi
Posted - 2011.08.16 18:28:00 - [67]
 

F@#K a bunch of Nullsec pansy a$$ crybaby griefers that aren't getting enough targets to make them happy. People don't go to NullSec to do PVE they go there for large Blob battles cheifly on gates. You moved all the lvl 5 agents to losec, with the result that almost no one does lvl 5 missions (a big waste of programing effort there for content now rarely used). Face it, high level mission content is done by people in hi-sec with very expensive ships fitted specifically for mission running, not for Pvp as they would need to be to do missions in lo or at least npc Nullsec. Sov Nullsec is a differnt matter, thats safer than Hisec as you know of any non blues in the area long before they are on grid. Nullsec Sov alliances are already the richest entities in the game and everything you are talking about is ways to make sure they stay that way. Its pretty easy to tell who your friends are. Give them all the best loot, the best money raising opportunities all in a a well guarded risk free environment and secure their game domination forever.

SuperBeastie
Caldari
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.16 19:14:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Tza Omi
F@#K a bunch of Nullsec pansy a$$ crybaby griefers that aren't getting enough targets to make them happy. People don't go to NullSec to do PVE they go there for large Blob battles cheifly on gates. You moved all the lvl 5 agents to losec, with the result that almost no one does lvl 5 missions (a big waste of programing effort there for content now rarely used). Face it, high level mission content is done by people in hi-sec with very expensive ships fitted specifically for mission running, not for Pvp as they would need to be to do missions in lo or at least npc Nullsec. Sov Nullsec is a differnt matter, thats safer than Hisec as you know of any non blues in the area long before they are on grid. Nullsec Sov alliances are already the richest entities in the game and everything you are talking about is ways to make sure they stay that way. Its pretty easy to tell who your friends are. Give them all the best loot, the best money raising opportunities all in a a well guarded risk free environment and secure their game domination forever.


Some alliances are wealthy (alliances that hold tech moons ie the north) but the sovereignty expenses and paying for all the towers and fuel and reimbursement for pilots adds up pretty quick. They don't have the trickle down effect lol.

Zyress
Posted - 2011.08.16 19:19:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Pinky Denmark
If it takes anyone 3 months doing lv 4 missions to pay back their mission ship perhaps you shouldn't buy fully pimped officer fit ships for something a T2 fit ship can handle fine.
Also Im sure you are forgetting about LP rewards and salvage in your calculations.

Pinky


And perhaps 32 Gig of Ram dual Quad Core processors, 1 TB SSD Drive and 3 High end Graphix cards in SLI are a little bit more than you need to play eve but it doesn't mean it isn't fun. People have been souping up their machines since we have had machines and it only makes sense that they would pimp out their mission boats. Its just one of the many things that make the game fun.

EI Digin
Caldari
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.16 19:35:00 - [70]
 

The major income source for most 0.0 players is running anomalies. Systems that are of lower (-1.0 to -0.6) security status which have more Sanctums and Havens, are routinely terrorized by single afk cloakers which deny people in lower end ships who cannot stand up to a stealth bomber or recon ship the ability to earn isk unhindered. PvEing in anomalies or belts in any ship is seen as a very boring task, with little to no effort involved. Currently, systems with a high security status (anything above -0.5 really) are rather worthless because the lower level anomalies that spawn are not worth the time in effort put in with any ship.

My suggestion would be to increase the reward and difficulty for high-end anomalies such as Sanctums and Havens. This can prevent a few stealth bombers or recons from taking over a system, as a small fleet should be able to handle a few bad guys, but also provide a juicy loot pinata for 15-20 man roaming or cloaky hotdrop gangs. Requiring a small amount of people to work together gives you some social interaction which alleviates the boredom, and using the wormhole/incursion AI in harder sites would make the sites more entertaining. It will also serve to increase the amount of people located within a richer pocket of space rather than spread out all over the place.

Improving the quality of mid and low level anomalies will help to make lesser 0.0 regions such as Providence and Cloud Ring more profitable and a juicier target for lower-level entities wishing to make their first steps into 0.0, and also provide a way to earn isk solo, or with more disposable ships for newer players who don't know how to defend themselves in 0.0 yet. The lesser regions would also not be worth as much to a larger alliance because the higher quality anomalies owned by a larger alliance should make it not worth it to upgrade the amount of sites in such poorer regions, possibly may not even be worth it to populate or to own these regions because nobody is running the sites.

Yes, you can make isk in highsec doing level 4's, but doing high-end activities like Sanctums, and escalations should give you a much, much higher isk/hour rate than it does currently. Level 4's shouldn't be nerfed, everything else should be buffed. Perhaps mid-level anomalies should give you the same amount of isk/hour as a level 4 mission?

The Incursion sites currently put in are an EXCELLENT step in the right direction for fixing PvE. I would not complain at all if Sanctums were replaced with the 5-10 man mission sites, complete with the hacking/mining requirements to complete them. There should be more "dungeons" and group content rather than single player grinding, and Incursion-style sites are the solution.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.16 23:04:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Nullsec systems tend to be safe on a minute-to-minute basis because people have invested considerable time and resources in making them that way, and I don't have a huge problem with that (so long as it's not producing game-breaking amounts of income). If you want to bring risk into it, consider the strategic-level risk involved in securing that space in the first place Smile



And you have given null sec people the moon minerals to satisfy strategic-level needs.
Now you want to give them even more "tactical" level income while keeping and even improvingthe strategical level income.

And somehow you hope that it will not end being a game-breaking level of income.
You haven't learned anything from the supercap proliferation?

SuperBeastie
Caldari
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.16 23:22:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Nullsec systems tend to be safe on a minute-to-minute basis because people have invested considerable time and resources in making them that way, and I don't have a huge problem with that (so long as it's not producing game-breaking amounts of income). If you want to bring risk into it, consider the strategic-level risk involved in securing that space in the first place Smile



And you have given null sec people the moon minerals to satisfy strategic-level needs.
Now you want to give them even more "tactical" level income while keeping and even improvingthe strategical level income.

And somehow you hope that it will not end being a game-breaking level of income.
You haven't learned anything from the supercap proliferation?



yes because every one in 0.0 has their own tech moon

0lesya
Amarr
Inglourious. Basterds.
Posted - 2011.08.17 00:04:00 - [73]
 

With Incarna you didn't introduce anything to improve game mechanics (not mentioning the things that got worse with incarna). Now you want to deliberately make things worse with your next expansion? WTF?
Lv4-Missions already have been nerfed by destroying the LP-value.

Another perspective: PvPers in 0.0 and Low-Sec usually will not bother buying clothes and stuff. So with Incarna you introduced microtransactions for the high-sec population to fix your financial problems. Fair enough, everyone's own choice if he wants to do a 40€ "micro"transaction for a monocle.
By nerfing high-sec, you will nerf the playground of the very people who shall give you their money for NeX-items. Those people will be annoyed and think twice about giving you their money so willingly. Do you think, this is clever?

What you are doing at the moment is messing with small things in Eve. If you want to do something really big and really innovative, do something about the sovereignty. Or if those big alliances pay CCP to much for their playground to annoy them, extend 0.0. Let those big alliances stay in their ancestral, beloved 0.0 regions and send all the 0.0 newcomers to some completely new regions.
Oh, and please extend your cluster for this extension. We don't want to get stuck in a jump queue. Wink

Thur Barbek
Posted - 2011.08.17 00:35:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

And you have given null sec people the moon minerals to satisfy strategic-level needs.
Now you want to give them even more "tactical" level income while keeping and even improvingthe strategical level income.

And somehow you hope that it will not end being a game-breaking level of income.
You haven't learned anything from the supercap proliferation?



The fun part of Eve is the fact that. If you don't like something, you are free to change it. Go get some of your friends and blow up a tech pos. If you don't want to do this, stop complaining about how people less lazy than you are making more money.

SuperBeastie
Caldari
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.08.17 00:42:00 - [75]
 

Okay I give up on all you people who are afraid the sky is falling!! They have not said a word about how they intend to implement these ideas. So saying they are nerfing highsec is most likely inaccurate. If I were them I would buff these other areas of the game.

Also if I were in charge instead of nerfing super I would buff titans and dreads to be able to beat on supers.

Takashi Halamoto
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.17 08:46:00 - [76]
 

i like the idea of dynamic pve content and mini dungeon small gang sites, though id put them alongside conventional sanctums,

and okay back when Razor alliance owned the north the Technitium paid for the alliance and sov bills, it also paid to replace logistics battleships and capitals lost in action for alliance ops,

the average members like me and such had to self finance our own wallets to buy new stuff and ammo, PvE income is for the players not the alliances,

besides the DRF now control almost all the technitium anyways

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.08.17 08:46:00 - [77]
 

Originally by: Zyress
Originally by: Pinky Denmark
If it takes anyone 3 months doing lv 4 missions to pay back their mission ship perhaps you shouldn't buy fully pimped officer fit ships for something a T2 fit ship can handle fine.
Also Im sure you are forgetting about LP rewards and salvage in your calculations.

Pinky


And perhaps 32 Gig of Ram dual Quad Core processors, 1 TB SSD Drive and 3 High end Graphix cards in SLI are a little bit more than you need to play eve but it doesn't mean it isn't fun. People have been souping up their machines since we have had machines and it only makes sense that they would pimp out their mission boats. Its just one of the many things that make the game fun.


I am fine with people pimping their ships and having fun in empire - But where is the risc... Eve brags about being isk vs reward game... But mission runners in empire only has the rewards with the current state of Eve. The greatest challenge when becoming filthy rich is to stay awake and do 1 more mission before they logoff Laughing

Alexander Renoir
Posted - 2011.08.17 09:34:00 - [78]
 

Edited by: Alexander Renoir on 17/08/2011 09:51:37
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


What? Even if you make significant more ISK in 0.0 than in highsec empire, I would NEVER go to 0.0 for PvE!! Because YOU can't go there without being blobbed from a larger alliance or corporation. No one MORE will go to 0.0 and make your super delicous best level 4 agent mission there except the current holders. You can only go into 0.0 sec if YOU belong to the alliance which holds the current sov there. The wrong corp or alliance will be terminated.

Impossible to reach NPC 0.0, because all gates are camped.

Make 100 Mill. per hour in order to lose 150 to hot drops? Wrong idea. Make 0.0 sec attractive and particularly achievable for smaller corps and alliances. The current 0.0 is just a place where smaller player collectives have to pay if they dont want to get podded. Is this a base to get more player into 0.0? To give even MORE Isk will only help the esteblished alliances there. But not the people you want in 0.0.

Your current plan sounds like: Lets make 5 Big alliances in 0.0 and all the other players have to arrange with them. I would like to see much more independent alliances there. Not a hand full of Kings and a lot of Slaves (renters) which is the current practice.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.17 13:42:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: CCP Greyscale on 17/08/2011 13:42:41
Originally by: Abdiel Kavash
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


Just curious, why the decision to remove the few anomalies which were on par income-wise with level 4 missions from most of nullsec a few months back then? Pre-nerf, I felt that nullsec PvE was just right on the risk/reward scale. Now - I couldn't be bothered, and neither could most of my corp.


We have a lot of design goals, and they often conflict, and while we try to balance them out we don't always get it as right as we'd like. We're still thinking about this particular situation.

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Nullsec systems tend to be safe on a minute-to-minute basis because people have invested considerable time and resources in making them that way, and I don't have a huge problem with that (so long as it's not producing game-breaking amounts of income). If you want to bring risk into it, consider the strategic-level risk involved in securing that space in the first place Smile



And you have given null sec people the moon minerals to satisfy strategic-level needs.
Now you want to give them even more "tactical" level income while keeping and even improvingthe strategical level income.

And somehow you hope that it will not end being a game-breaking level of income.
You haven't learned anything from the supercap proliferation?



Moon mineral value is currently broken, I don't think anyone is seriously disputing that.

Originally by: Alexander Renoir
Edited by: Alexander Renoir on 17/08/2011 09:51:37
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


What? Even if you make significant more ISK in 0.0 than in highsec empire, I would NEVER go to 0.0 for PvE!! Because YOU can't go there without being blobbed from a larger alliance or corporation. No one MORE will go to 0.0 and make your super delicous best level 4 agent mission there except the current holders. You can only go into 0.0 sec if YOU belong to the alliance which holds the current sov there. The wrong corp or alliance will be terminated.

Impossible to reach NPC 0.0, because all gates are camped.

Make 100 Mill. per hour in order to lose 150 to hot drops? Wrong idea. Make 0.0 sec attractive and particularly achievable for smaller corps and alliances. The current 0.0 is just a place where smaller player collectives have to pay if they dont want to get podded. Is this a base to get more player into 0.0? To give even MORE Isk will only help the esteblished alliances there. But not the people you want in 0.0.

Your current plan sounds like: Lets make 5 Big alliances in 0.0 and all the other players have to arrange with them. I would like to see much more independent alliances there. Not a hand full of Kings and a lot of Slaves (renters) which is the current practice.


Right, and for people like you we know that you're never likely to move and we're not trying to force you to. It's people who are interested but can't make the sums add up that we're concerned about.

Kotami
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.08.17 14:45:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Originally by: Alexander Renoir
Edited by: Alexander Renoir on 17/08/2011 09:51:37
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


What? Even if you make significant more ISK in 0.0 than in highsec empire, I would NEVER go to 0.0 for PvE!! Because YOU can't go there without being blobbed from a larger alliance or corporation. No one MORE will go to 0.0 and make your super delicous best level 4 agent mission there except the current holders. You can only go into 0.0 sec if YOU belong to the alliance which holds the current sov there. The wrong corp or alliance will be terminated.

Impossible to reach NPC 0.0, because all gates are camped.

Make 100 Mill. per hour in order to lose 150 to hot drops? Wrong idea. Make 0.0 sec attractive and particularly achievable for smaller corps and alliances. The current 0.0 is just a place where smaller player collectives have to pay if they dont want to get podded. Is this a base to get more player into 0.0? To give even MORE Isk will only help the esteblished alliances there. But not the people you want in 0.0.

Your current plan sounds like: Lets make 5 Big alliances in 0.0 and all the other players have to arrange with them. I would like to see much more independent alliances there. Not a hand full of Kings and a lot of Slaves (renters) which is the current practice.


Right, and for people like you we know that you're never likely to move and we're not trying to force you to. It's people who are interested but can't make the sums add up that we're concerned about.


I hope your answer is not implying that you are in favor of "you must join an alliance in nullsec to succeed". I think there are many players (and corps of all sizes) who would be interested in establishing a presence in nullsec but who also want to retain their identity and independence. Myself included.

Plyn
Posted - 2011.08.17 15:30:00 - [81]
 

Originally by: Kotami
I hope your answer is not implying that you are in favor of "you must join an alliance in nullsec to succeed". I think there are many players (and corps of all sizes) who would be interested in establishing a presence in nullsec but who also want to retain their identity and independence. Myself included.


It's a multiplayer game. If you wanna be top-notch you have to work together with other players.

You don't have to be part of a sov-alliance to go to null, or in an alliance, or even in a corp! I used to ninja rat in Syndicate quite well back in the day. BUT if you want to PvE in the BEST spots, you're going to have to participate! If you want to hold sov, you're going to have to play the political game.

CCP wants to encourage people to go to null because that's where the game is intended to be played. Sure there's stuff to do in highsec, and maybe one or two to do in low, but at the end of the day, the theme of production has clearly been (for a long long time now) to get people/corps/alliances to strike out and follow the route of fighting for space. They're not going to FORCE you, but you shouldn't be surprised that they've put a lot of incentive to going there.

If you want your 10 man corp to rock it out in no security space and make a ton of isk, go to a wormhole. That's exactly what they're there for. Smaller groups that don't want to deal with null politics, potential blobbing, etc. If anything, that's probably the best PvE isk to be made in the game, but too many players are scared to death of having to scan for sites, no local, and the logistical issues with not having a static route to Jita. Billions there... Waiting for your small corp to go claim as yours.

Oh, and for those people saying that null sec PvPers don't care about clothes, I'm pretty sure I saw an -A- guy on a moros kill mail wearing a monocle the other day.

Sonya Mag
Posted - 2011.08.17 17:32:00 - [82]
 

-- about the design goals, this is my personal opinion --

Solo support / Challenge and reward / Best PvE pay / Groups best / Many ship classes
TOTALLY AGREE!


Challenge and reward -> Rats in anomalies and complexes should have the same IA than incursions rats, less ships, less spawns, more hit points, more damage and of course more bounties. Rats in gates and belts, leave them like they are. Then By making the rats smarter and harder to kill you can put much bigger bounties on them bringing reward into play.

Solo support and Groups best -> All complexes and anomalies should be transformed to be or solo or a group dungeon.

Many ship classes -> All complexes and anomalies should be transformed to only allow specific types of ships.

Now we have several problems, like how to enforce ship types or group PvE?

It’s simple, implement the same system already used in incursions in the anomalies and complexes. You go in with the wrong type of ship, you get nothing! You go in with the wrong number of persons you get nothing! If you go in with more persons but divided in several fleets, then only the fleet that does the most damage gets the money! Payouts for anomalies and complexes are only processed after the last rat is dead, no more bounties for each rat inside an anomaly or complex! All payouts should be fixed and equal for all party members. Faction loot in complexes/anomalies will only drop if the numbers/ship types present in the grid at the time of the kill are correct.

One more thing, anomalies sites payouts should be proportional to the time it takes to run them or pilots will avoid some in favor of others! For example in 0.0 nobody does sites class 8 below, is a waste of time. If you have a heaven a couple of AUs waiting for you everybody goes for it!

--- just dreaming a little bit ---

For example, with minimal effort it should be possible to use the existing anomalies that go from class 1 (Hideaway) to 10 (Sanctum) for something I described above:

the quickies...

Class 1 = (Faction) Hideaway -> frigs / 1-2 player / difficulty easy / ~12-15 minutes playtime / payout 12M
Class 2 = (Faction) Burrow -> frigs / 1-2 players / difficulty easy / ~12-15 minutes playtime / payout 12M each
Class 3 = (Faction) Refuge -> frigs / 1-2 players / difficulty easy / ~12-15 minutes playtime / payout 12M each

the farming ones...

Class 4 = (Faction) Den -> cruisers/bc / 1-2 player / difficulty medium / ~25-30 minutes playtime / payout 25M
Class 5 = (Faction) Yard -> cruisers/bc / 1-2 players / difficulty medium / ~25-30 minutes playtime / payout 25M each
Class 6 = (Faction) Rally Point -> cruisers/bc / 1-2 players / difficulty medium / ~25-30 minutes playtime / payout 25M each

the "I need a challenge" ones...

Class 7 = (Faction) Port -> cruisers/bc/bs/capital / 2-3 players or 1 capital / difficulty advanced / ~45-50 minutes playtime / payout 45M each
Class 8 = (Faction) Hub -> cruisers/bc/bs/capital / 2-3 players or 1 capital / difficulty advanced / ~45-50 minutes playtime / payout 45M each

the "I need logi or we will die or I have capitals" ones

Class 9 = (Faction) Haven -> cruisers/bc/bs/capitals/supers / 3-5 players or 2 capitals or 1 super / difficulty FU / ~60+ minutes playtime / payout 60M each
Class 10 = (Faction) Sanctum -> cruisers/bc/bs/capitals/supers / 3-5 players or 2 capitals or 1 super / difficulty FU / ~60+ minutes playtime / payout 60M each

continues...

Sonya Mag
Posted - 2011.08.17 17:35:00 - [83]
 

Best loot
AGREE


- Officer stuff only should drop in 0.0.
- Faction loot also should only drop in 0.0
- About the normal loot, the only changes should be in quantities, rats should drop double the loot quantities they drop in empire and at least half this loot should be named.

Best agents
AGREE but I think this is on the wrong place, it should belong to the NPC 0.0 section, but anyway...


A big problem nowadays is that agents are in stations, stations are always camped, so getting/delivering missions is always a problem, people just give up, too much danger.
Also if you get a mission and skip the campers, 90% of the time you will get hotdropped, ganked in the mission site itself.
I know that this 0.0 but for missions to work in this area of space we need to mitigate this 2 issues a little bit or missions in 0.0 will always be something nobody does or wants to do.

Some Ideas to fix these issues:

- Remove agents from all the stations. Put them in space.
- Create pockets of agent areas where you can get/deliver the missions in a “safe” way. These agents will be surrounded by guards, lots of them, with armor, firepower and AI similar of the Sleepers! These agent areas are NO PVP allowed areas, so if someone attacks others here will get attacked by these guards. If you respond to an aggression you are going down also.
- These guards are not Concord Gods, they are killable and with proper numbers you can take them down. The idea is that these agents areas are safe up to a point because this is 0.0 not empire!.
For example if 1 to 3 guys go there for a quick kill you are relative safe if you can tank them until the guards do their job, but if they bring 10 friends, well... bye, bye.
- About the missions, they must be always run inside a deadspace pocket. This will not be a full guaranty of safety but will avoid a direct warp and the usual cynos followed by a hotdrop. Once more this is a mitigation to incentivize doing missions, since this is not empire there is no guarantee than you will not face others in combat during a mission.
- Also mission rats should have improved IA and change targets if someone else enters a mission pocket, so if someone goes in for PVP with the pilot that is doing the mission, they should face the rats just like the guy that is already there.

I think these 3 points equilibrate mission running allot and make them viable for 0.0. They bring basic safety when getting/delivering and making the mission and if pvp happens inside the mission pocket there is justice and fair play for all the involved because the rats will spread damage/points/ecm/whatever over all the ships involved and not only the pilot running the mission.

Thur Barbek
Posted - 2011.08.17 18:10:00 - [84]
 

Edited by: Thur Barbek on 17/08/2011 18:17:47
Originally by: Sonya Mag

- Remove agents from all the stations. Put them in space.
- Create pockets of agent areas where you can get/deliver the missions in a “safe” way. These agents will be surrounded by guards, lots of them, with armor, firepower and AI similar of the Sleepers! These agent areas are NO PVP allowed areas, so if someone attacks others here will get attacked by these guards. If you respond to an aggression you are going down also.
- These guards are not Concord Gods, they are killable and with proper numbers you can take them down. The idea is that these agents areas are safe up to a point because this is 0.0 not empire!.


Easy way to do this is to setup a NPC pos with no shield and special modules, and use empire navy AI/difficulty.
Edit: or.mail the pos forcefield to players with appropriate standings to the agent or faction inside the pos.

Alexander Renoir
Posted - 2011.08.17 18:41:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Kotami
I hope your answer is not implying that you are in favor of "you must join an alliance in nullsec to succeed". I think there are many players (and corps of all sizes) who would be interested in establishing a presence in nullsec but who also want to retain their identity and independence. Myself included.


Yeah Kotami! THIS is exactly what I mean. Thank you for understanding an making even more clear. Smile

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.08.17 20:59:00 - [86]
 

incursions / incursion like pve and stopping the botter.


Ok you know those nasty incursion npc's like the deltoles and outunis and other crap like that. Well take those and make small roaming gangs with them.

Say for instance that sansha npc space spawns 10 of these nasty buggers, they woudl leave sansha space and start going on a path randomly traveling up 0.0 to other sov space and do what a normal roaming gang would do. Look for targets and kill them. They would, use gates, use a d-scan and they would hunt based on the local count. Hey maybe even camp stations.

Advantages - solves the ratting / botter problem since they wont appear in local anyone who bots will most likely get caught off guard, because anyone who has ever done an incursion knows that even 4 of these guys w/o logi means insta death.

Rewards - ummm maybe give a bounty pay off or, give insta concord lp or lp to the faction of your choosing.

DonWaan Incognito
Posted - 2011.08.17 23:44:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
incursions / incursion like pve and stopping the botter.


Ok you know those nasty incursion npc's like the deltoles and outunis and other crap like that. Well take those and make small roaming gangs with them.

Say for instance that sansha npc space spawns 10 of these nasty buggers, they woudl leave sansha space and start going on a path randomly traveling up 0.0 to other sov space and do what a normal roaming gang would do. Look for targets and kill them. They would, use gates, use a d-scan and they would hunt based on the local count. Hey maybe even camp stations.

Advantages - solves the ratting / botter problem since they wont appear in local anyone who bots will most likely get caught off guard, because anyone who has ever done an incursion knows that even 4 of these guys w/o logi means insta death.

Rewards - ummm maybe give a bounty pay off or, give insta concord lp or lp to the faction of your choosing.


if these things are put in game they have to show up on dscan and probes... there has to be a way to detect them otherwise you would be ratting in your marauder and then all of a sudden you get insta popped... not fun...

though if i can hunt the hunters with a small gang (recons with black ops waiting...) i could turn a nice profit...

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.08.18 02:01:00 - [88]
 

Originally by: DonWaan Incognito
Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
incursions / incursion like pve and stopping the botter.


Ok you know those nasty incursion npc's like the deltoles and outunis and other crap like that. Well take those and make small roaming gangs with them.

Say for instance that sansha npc space spawns 10 of these nasty buggers, they woudl leave sansha space and start going on a path randomly traveling up 0.0 to other sov space and do what a normal roaming gang would do. Look for targets and kill them. They would, use gates, use a d-scan and they would hunt based on the local count. Hey maybe even camp stations.

Advantages - solves the ratting / botter problem since they wont appear in local anyone who bots will most likely get caught off guard, because anyone who has ever done an incursion knows that even 4 of these guys w/o logi means insta death.

Rewards - ummm maybe give a bounty pay off or, give insta concord lp or lp to the faction of your choosing.


if these things are put in game they have to show up on dscan and probes... there has to be a way to detect them otherwise you would be ratting in your marauder and then all of a sudden you get insta popped... not fun...

though if i can hunt the hunters with a small gang (recons with black ops waiting...) i could turn a nice profit...


Ahh good point, well as stated trying to bring in ideas to create more pve and different types of pve for 0.0, as for me, i lived in 0.0 long before sanctums, havens and all those cool anomoly stuff, so i made my living ratting and mining.

But hunter gangs? sounds interesting could go along with small gang pvp but also be pve at the same time. Anyway for detecting them? what about a bar like in incursions on the upper left, and it has a number on it say 10/10 representing out of 10 rats, 10 are alive. That way pve'ers have some warning to get safe. The rats wouldnt insta warp to you, they woudl behave like players. warp to a safe spot, launch "probes" , d-scan and then warp to a target. that usually takes about 1 - 3 minutes, which is enough warning. However people who routinely farm / bot rats would not see this and get caught off guard and lose precious ships.

Ava n'Daara
Posted - 2011.08.18 08:25:00 - [89]
 

The biggest problem with PvE from my perspective is your definition of Risk. You seem to define Risk in terms of PvP when in fact it should be merely in terms of the chance to lose your ship(s).

If you add risk to PvE even in hisec, you should still get appropriate rewards in hisec that are currently only available in nullsec.

You can add risk to PvE in a number of ways:
- smarter AI or otherwise tougher rats
- accelerator gate ship restrictions (hull size and/or number of ships allowed through)
- dynamic content (variable numbers of rats spawning in different locations with random triggers and waves of reinforcements).

I can't see myself ever leaving hisec.. I just don't have the time to recover PvP-related losses that I have little control over. If I lose stuff to PvE though, it's entirely my bad and I'll just have to choke on it, learn from it, and move on. At least the NPCs won't intentionally take my +5s.

I should be able to scan down Sanctums in hisec. They should be risky enough by their content to offer up suitable rewards. The PvE risk should be the same in hisec as in nullsec and the rewards the same.

What do the corp/alliance wars in nullsec have to do with PvE besides giving them safehavens and reducing their PvP risk? What is so wrong with allowing casual solo pilots access to the quality PvE content with minimal PvP risk that alliances have in nullsec given sufficient PvE risk?

Incursions aren't practical for solo pilots and wormholes take you out of hisec so they're out for me. Cosmic sigs in hisec are far too easy for the available ships (HAS/T3) that can run them and give generally low-tier loot. Not having Sanctums and access to better mods in hisec doesn't make me want to rush to nullsec, it makes me want to find something else to play.

Keeping PvE players out of the best PvE content simply because it sits in (or behind) PvP territory doesn't make sense to me.

See General.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.18 10:54:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: Kotami
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Originally by: Alexander Renoir
Edited by: Alexander Renoir on 17/08/2011 09:51:37
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Yeah, that sort of profitability issue is the sort of thing we're primarily focused on when it comes to adjusting rewards. Not this specific thing (although it sounds kinda broken), but the general sense that people shouldn't look at nullsec and think "I would, but I make more money staying in empire". That's a failure for us.


What? Even if you make significant more ISK in 0.0 than in highsec empire, I would NEVER go to 0.0 for PvE!! Because YOU can't go there without being blobbed from a larger alliance or corporation. No one MORE will go to 0.0 and make your super delicous best level 4 agent mission there except the current holders. You can only go into 0.0 sec if YOU belong to the alliance which holds the current sov there. The wrong corp or alliance will be terminated.

Impossible to reach NPC 0.0, because all gates are camped.

Make 100 Mill. per hour in order to lose 150 to hot drops? Wrong idea. Make 0.0 sec attractive and particularly achievable for smaller corps and alliances. The current 0.0 is just a place where smaller player collectives have to pay if they dont want to get podded. Is this a base to get more player into 0.0? To give even MORE Isk will only help the esteblished alliances there. But not the people you want in 0.0.

Your current plan sounds like: Lets make 5 Big alliances in 0.0 and all the other players have to arrange with them. I would like to see much more independent alliances there. Not a hand full of Kings and a lot of Slaves (renters) which is the current practice.


Right, and for people like you we know that you're never likely to move and we're not trying to force you to. It's people who are interested but can't make the sums add up that we're concerned about.


I hope your answer is not implying that you are in favor of "you must join an alliance in nullsec to succeed". I think there are many players (and corps of all sizes) who would be interested in establishing a presence in nullsec but who also want to retain their identity and independence. Myself included.


Nope, not intending to imply that at all. The whole point of the "smallholding" topic is move further away from that.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

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