open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Rewarding small gang pvp vs blobbing
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Morel Nova
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.09.16 08:01:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Morel Nova on 16/09/2009 11:22:02
Problem:
1. Due to risk vs reward the most sound thing to do in eve when you want to kill someone is to throw overwhelming force at them. There is no downside to throwing 80 people against one if you have that many available.

2. loot drops from a kill are hardly worth anything, my 170 mil vagabond might usually drop 8 mil in loot, the rest destroyed. this means that to profit or break even from pvp:ing I have to kill a a huge number of ships and actually be able to loot the field and not run from reinforcements.

Suggested Solution:
Scale loot drop chance with number of participants on a killmail. you got 50 BS shooting that one bs? everything on it will be vaporized. I kill another assault frigate in a 1v1, 95% drops. it should scale between those extremes, but not linear, you want some decent drops up to maybe 5 people. This means that if you have a 50 v 50 fight you do it for some reason. e.g fighting over territory or resources etc, but it would open up the possibility to actually profit from being a very good solo/small gang player doing hit and runs.

(another option is a new gunnery/missile skill called something like "expert targeting" or something that lowers the damage to things fitted on target ships instead (would of course give the most effect when solo and would scale as above with gangs))

I think this would have the best effect by re-arranging item values also, 120 mil vaga + 40 mil fittings turns into 100 mil fittings on 60 mil vaga for example, but I imagine that would have too much of a market effect to be a simple change so probably best left alone for now.

Raimo
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.09.16 09:12:00 - [2]
 

Very good idea.

Thenoran
Caldari
Tranquility Industries
Posted - 2009.09.16 12:56:00 - [3]
 

Loving the idea.

The value of a destroyed ship should really be improved so that looting/salvaging becomes practical.

Visir
Caldari
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:11:00 - [4]
 

I love this idea!

+1

Red zeon
Caldari
Sacred Templars
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2009.09.16 14:27:00 - [5]
 

love the idea as a solo hunter.
also the skill idea i dont like.
why? since all the pvper WILL train it to atleast lvl4, and then dont want new players to join the gang before they get that skill, that would only stop new players from joining a gang. then the skill is pointless. only a disadvantage

Jared D'Uroth
Minmatar
ElitistOps
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.09.16 21:29:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Jared D''Uroth on 16/09/2009 21:30:28
Can see where you are coming from, but dividing up loot between gangmates already gives decreasing drop, per person, for each person in the gang.


EDIT: Maybe have a base drop of 30% no matter how many people on the mail?

Morel Nova
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.09.17 08:52:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Morel Nova on 17/09/2009 08:55:06
Originally by: Jared D'Uroth
Edited by: Jared D''Uroth on 16/09/2009 21:30:28
Can see where you are coming from, but dividing up loot between gangmates already gives decreasing drop, per person, for each person in the gang.


EDIT: Maybe have a base drop of 30% no matter how many people on the mail?


I know it gives decreasing rewards already, but the idea is also designed to make it more profitable for the solo/small gang player. The current drop frequency is way too bad. Adjusting for much more expensive mods vs cheap t2 hulls is imho the best solution, but I dont see that happening as its a major major change.

Yesterday I killed a couple of t2 ships solo total worth about 180 mil, the loot drops were worth about 15 mil total (and I actually got pretty lucky with drops, except some which I couldnt pick up due to reinforcements but thats beside the point) thats a pretty bad screwed up ratio imho. I did end up losing my ship worth about 40 mil myself too. See how this is a problem? if everything dropped I would could have made 60-65 mil (assuming I could carry it out and not die at the end of course)

EDIT. I think I misunderstood you. yes a baseline might be ok. just for the lulz over someone in the fleet stealing that faction item that dropped :P

I also agree that the skill idea was probably useless complication.

Korvin
Gallente
Shadow Kingdom
Best Alliance
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:32:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Korvin on 17/09/2009 11:32:39
my vote is - NO

Dr Karsun
Gallente
Coffee Lovers Brewing Club
Posted - 2009.09.17 11:57:00 - [9]
 

Seems very nice. There would be a reaso to it too, when 50 ships shoot one, ther's a lot of missiles/bullets hitting the wreck after it explodes (or at least it should work like that), those charges destroy what's left in the wreck (modules are very delicate, right?).

The down side of this idea is that... When people are defending a territory, I don't really think they give a damn about what's left of those ships, they just want the enemies to be dust.

And what about caps in this case? I can't really imagine a fleet blowing up a carrier without at least a dozen bs's shooting at it (non-cap fleet fighting caps).

Aside from that, well, it could be a very nice idea :)

Callesta
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:02:00 - [10]
 

Great Idea, Makes sense and would seem to incentivise 1v1 pvp. So 1 vs 1 would have the most drop, 2 vs 1 less and so on. you might also integrate ship classes but that one is less important. It seems they really do need to buff what drops from ships so many times you get so little. You could make new skill apply to loot and salvage.

rEcKleSsMOnKeY
Posted - 2009.09.17 14:30:00 - [11]
 

This is the worst idea ever as it defeats the point the game. Pvp'ing is not meant to be profitable... That's where the isk earned from other venues is spent. In other words u just want to pvp all day long and actually make tons of isk from it? it's called ratting give it a whirl. This proposed change will completely unbalance the game.

eXeGee
Pink Bunnies
Cartel.
Posted - 2009.09.17 16:50:00 - [12]
 

Interesting idea, only thing what worries me a bit with it is that players could became too greedy. :) But i think it's worth a try.

Tau Dades
Caldari
Even End of the Universe
Posted - 2009.09.17 19:22:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: rEcKleSsMOnKeY
This is the worst idea ever as it defeats the point the game. Pvp'ing is not meant to be profitable...


The point of the game for you is not necessarily the point of the game for someone else. who says pvp is not meant to be profitable? I am willing to bet if pvp was more profitable you would see more carebears venturing into lo sec to give it a try.

Yokohead
Intergalactic Hunters of ManBearPig
Daisho Syndicate
Posted - 2009.09.17 23:39:00 - [14]
 

Definitely support this idea, and it would make a decent amount of sense. A 1v1 battle (unless massively mismatched) isn't going to overload the target with tons of ship-vaporizing DPS. Possibly scale it - destroying a Cruiser+ hull in a Frigate drops more vs the Cruiser dropping the Frigate due to the gun size and overall damage.

Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2009.09.18 00:12:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 18/09/2009 00:12:47
Quote:
who says pvp is not meant to be profitable?


CCP.

http://eve-search.com/thread/861249

Quote:
Hi there.

Some nice points raised.

Basically - PvP is not a profession. It doesn't get you any isk, but makes all sides loose isk (destroyed items, repairs, ammo, etc)

Ship shooting ship is what you do to protect your income, it doesn't make you income by itself.


They just need to do more to encourage competition and eliminate riskless ISK printing machines with infinite scalability so that this actually works.

Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
Posted - 2009.09.18 00:16:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Cpt Branko on 18/09/2009 00:17:59
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 18/09/2009 00:17:21
This is a very nice idea.

PVP IS profitable, anyway. Inability to profit from it would make EVE, well, preety much like any other MMO on the market.

Rewarding people who participate in smaller scale fights seems just like a sensible idea.

Morel Nova
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.09.18 08:28:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Morel Nova on 18/09/2009 08:58:36

yes, pvp can sometimes be profitable. I made a profit flying arty thrashers in amamake killing and looting solo targets. This system and circumstances is pretty special though and it only works because arty thrashers are so incredibly cheap and its a system where many solo players come to get 1v1 fights.

This change tbh wouldnt affect most of eve combat as right now its 30 v 1 fights etc just plain ganks, which makes sense from a risk/reward standpoint. The point to this idea is to reward people in small, highly skilled and organized groups (or lone wolves), and perhaps see some small shift away from the "our bees will blot out the sun" approach to current eve.

I'm not sure if this system would affect the market much at all. basically youd get no drops from massive ganks (most of eve pvp) and much more loot for small people, so it might in fact make it even better for the small gang as prices on t2 modules might go up (more destroyed over all in fights). but thats speculations of course.

Originally by: rEcKleSsMOnKeY
This is the worst idea ever as it defeats the point the game. Pvp'ing is not meant to be profitable... That's where the isk earned from other venues is spent. In other words u just want to pvp all day long and actually make tons of isk from it? it's called ratting give it a whirl. This proposed change will completely unbalance the game.


you would only make that isk from it if you were better than your targets and could actually get away with the loot after a fight/roam. And some people live off pvp. Pirates camping highsec gates all day in gangs for example. The problem with that for me is that its again 30v1 blob combat where actual combat skill matters very little (requires planning organization etc of course, but not much piloting skill). I want to be able to at least get close to living off being a roaming pirate those months I get lucky and dont die too much.

oh and nobody would get rich from this. Removing my loss if I got 100% drops on my example roam I would have made about 20-30 mil for 2-3 hours of play. compared to a level 4 mission with no risk whatsoever thats really bad.

Ulstan
Posted - 2009.09.30 15:47:00 - [18]
 

I like this idea. It rewards you for not using excessive amounts of force to destroy a ship. Makes perfecct sense from a logical standpoint as well, which is always a nice perk.

Captain Vampire
Caldari
Kung Fu Vampire Ninja's
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:42:00 - [19]
 

+2

Signed. I used to make 100s of millions a week PvPing. Heck, kickstarted my reselling buisness. PvP is no longer for making ISK, but taking ISK away from your foe.

LoPan MacTavish
NQX Innovations
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.10.01 01:20:00 - [20]
 

As an ex low sec pirate myself, I fully support this idea.

WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt
Posted - 2009.10.01 01:32:00 - [21]
 

I support this idea because it means when I suicide people on gates in highsec, I get 100% of their cargo instead of half!

Grumples McGee
Posted - 2009.10.01 18:17:00 - [22]
 

Edited by: Grumples McGee on 01/10/2009 18:19:33
Originally by: Morel Nova
Scale loot drop chance with number of participants on a killmail.

I do like this idea.

You win a 1v1? The guy drops basically everything. Maybe it even converts his rig into extra salvage for the wreck. All the time and resources that went into his hull are still lost but maybe you get most of the rest.

You kill someone and there's 45 people on the killmail? He drops nothing. You blew him to bits.


Obviously people will still do 45 man cyno drops to kill solo Cyclones and so forth but at least there's a good incentive to do small roaming gangs and not always call in the entire armada.


As the OP states, right now there's no reason not to ALWAYS call in the entire armada and that's a problem for any EVE player who does not have an armada.

Sunset Rogue
Posted - 2009.10.01 19:49:00 - [23]
 

I like this idea but there are two problems:

1) A battleship humping station.
Except in cases of extreme incompetence, you need minimum 5-8 battleships to gank one that is station humping. Newer, lower skilled players need even more people because they have lower damage output.
This idea would (in a way) reward people who hump station all day and that seems very wrong to me.

2) Capitals.
A carrier will never break the tank of another carrier, and a dread will never break the tank of another dread (unless they are idiots Wink). If you don't have capitals at your disposal, you need a substantial number of people to kill it before self destruct denies you both the loot AND the mail.


I like the idea of rewarding small gang pvp, but can we find a way that considers points 1 & 2?

Mezikk
Earned In Blood
Posted - 2009.10.03 05:31:00 - [24]
 

I like this idea, particularly modules being worth more then ships. Days of good piracy may yet return.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.10.03 07:28:00 - [25]
 

It is a great idea, but has to be tempered;
A maximum has to be imposed so that a solo kill does not give you a complete fit, say 50% with a double or triple chance of any high meta-level items dropping.
Similarly a minimum should be imposed, 10-15% of mods dropped would insure that there is always something however crappy in a wreck.
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Rewarding people who participate in smaller scale fights seems just like a sensible idea.


Yea, seems very out of place on this board, I sometimes think common sense must be against the posting rules or something Laughing
Originally by: Sunset Rogue
1) A battleship humping station.

2) Capitals.

The 5-8 BS will get the same or better drops from that scenario compared to what they get now. Blobbing is excessive numbers which usually means 20-30+:1.
Who in their right mind engages capitals in docking range without a monster-bump already lined up?
Either way, it represents a minority of engagement so it is the odd one out in the grand scheme.

Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
Posted - 2009.10.03 07:58:00 - [26]
 

Edited by: Veldya on 03/10/2009 08:05:21
I thought about this and it is an even bigger issue for larger scale encounters where people don't even bother to fit tanks anymore because of the brutal damage that comes in from focus firing and it makes wing and squad commanders largely redundant other than for boost effects because all everyone does is follow fleet commanders.

I think about all the sci-fi movies and nobody is opening up on just one ship at a time, why is that? When you think about modern warfare it has never been about focus firing either, even when you got to historical naval battles.

I believe a lot has to do with range and the consequences of friendly fire, well, outside the US military that seems to be an issue.

EVE combat doesn't really obey many aspects such as line of sight and the effects of ship collision are non-existant so you can have 1000 ships just shoot through eachother. For such a complex game it has really overly simplified a few basic concepts.

I think the more fire hits a ship the more it should at least disrupt the damage effects. If you have tons of armour and structure flying off the ship, a lot of explosions, missile detonations, electromagnetic disturbance it would be harder and harder to hit and damage a ship with so much interference.

I'd like to see diminishing returns on damage, would like to see modules that could give you very brief periods of significant damage reduction or immunity that would break up fighting from just being cosmic blobfests.

I think range is too great. Can do too much damage at long range. I want to see los impact fights, if your buddy moves his ship in front of your beams then you dice him up. It would be better to see combat also be more engaging. I was tackling a ship last week and reading my mail at the same time. Combat should be more engaging.

I like small scale PvP because stuff is typically in your face, it is visually more engaging as well.

Morel Nova
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.10.06 11:59:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Morel Nova on 06/10/2009 12:02:23
Originally by: Sunset Rogue
I like this idea but there are two problems:

1) A battleship humping station.
Except in cases of extreme incompetence, you need minimum 5-8 battleships to gank one that is station humping. Newer, lower skilled players need even more people because they have lower damage output.
This idea would (in a way) reward people who hump station all day and that seems very wrong to me.



this is not really an issue with this idea, station humping needs looking at by CCP. the base problem is that many patches have increased HP and buffer tanking but not the aggression timers. also current agression timers are completely insufficient considering capitals. Also its a lame form of pvp that should be nerfed into oblivion imho.

Originally by: Sunset Rogue

2) Capitals.
A carrier will never break the tank of another carrier, and a dread will never break the tank of another dread (unless they are idiots Wink). If you don't have capitals at your disposal, you need a substantial number of people to kill it before self destruct denies you both the loot AND the mail.



capitals killing capitals isnt really small gang warfare, but with the scale I thought about you would still get more loot with 4 BS killing a carrier than current system.

self-destruct is also another problem. I like that you can cheat the enemy of your loot, but killmails should definatly be given. I mean a frig scrambling me will get a mail if concord kills me right now on the server.

Triksterism
Spacecataz.
Posted - 2009.11.02 20:57:00 - [28]
 

/signed for my Swedish lover and his infinite Ikea wisdom.

Larinioides cornutus
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:26:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Larinioides cornutus on 03/11/2009 11:30:24
Originally by: WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt
I support this idea because it means when I suicide people on gates in highsec, I get 100% of their cargo instead of half!


^^^^^ I agree with this.

Would PVP be more profitable? Not it will not. 0.0 fleet would still blob to no end because it's much more important to win an engagement then risk losing more ships or outright losing just for some petty loots. This indeed is a pirating/ganking direct boost. Those activities are already making money, and are not PVP in my book.

Tho pre-dominion DD would be even more economic to use.

Morel Nova
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.11.12 15:42:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Larinioides cornutus
Edited by: Larinioides cornutus on 03/11/2009 11:30:24
Originally by: WarDecEvading NPCCorpAlt
I support this idea because it means when I suicide people on gates in highsec, I get 100% of their cargo instead of half!


^^^^^ I agree with this.

Would PVP be more profitable? Not it will not. 0.0 fleet would still blob to no end because it's much more important to win an engagement then risk losing more ships or outright losing just for some petty loots. This indeed is a pirating/ganking direct boost. Those activities are already making money, and are not PVP in my book.

Tho pre-dominion DD would be even more economic to use.


The point of this change is not to give the 40 man blob extra income. You are right its a piracy boost, and I was showing numbers proving that even very good roaming pirates dont make enough money right now due to cheap mods vs expensive hulls. This is to boost people like me, or genos, or other small roaming pirate groups that like to go around with 1-3 guys and do raids on big alliances space. I agree it would boost suicide ganking. personally I don't care as it has been pretty nerfed already, but I'm open to suggestions.

a suggestion is to scale the individual encounter. use battleclinic points as base or something. eg. smartbombing rokh >>> my shuttle in rancer so drops are crap/mostly destroyed by the overpowered attack whereas as me killing a zealot in my taranis has everything drop due to the ability to more precisely damage the target.


Pages: [1] 2

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