These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Warp Drive Active: On Dynamic World Events
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
#21 - 2012-09-08 23:12:57 UTC
Nalha Saldana wrote:
Eve's content really lacks dynamics, this is how they could make pve fun!


And similar Important: Connect PVE better to PVP.

Remove insurance.
Oberine Noriepa
#22 - 2012-09-10 23:24:42 UTC
Bumping this so it gets a little more exposure.

∃
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-09-11 01:12:46 UTC
All of this. Anything that encourages players to get together (either to cooperate or to kill each other) is a good thing in my book.
Kesthely
Mestana
#24 - 2012-09-11 07:01:32 UTC
I'm likeing this idea, especially when you start looking at opposing factions events that would take players in a different faction area so standings and / or beeing in a militia can escalate things even further eg:

An amarr convoy picking up new slaves in a minmater controlled system could spice things up for faction warfare persons, make the risks (and rewards) for people that have a negative standing to one of the factions a lot higher, and allow a mirror event(s) beeing created an event to intercept and destroy the convoy before it reaches the slaves, Free the slaves on the way back etc.
JamesCLK
#25 - 2012-09-11 09:59:06 UTC
Please discuss it on the next episode of WDA too! :D

-- -.-- / -.-. .-.. --- -. . / .. ... / - --- --- / . -..- .--. . -. ... .. ...- . / - --- / ..- -. -.. --- -.-. -.- / ... - --- .--. / .--. .-.. . .- ... . / ... . -. -.. / .... . .-.. .--. / ... - --- .--.
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#26 - 2012-09-12 12:03:06 UTC
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#27 - 2012-09-13 12:18:20 UTC
Is there anyone with some criticism to what's been suggested ? Even those not interested in PvE at all should find a potential touch point here, since the attempt is to combine a PvE extension with PvP aspects.

I think it is very interesting to give high-sec more options to legitimately PvP in addition to CONCORD sanctioned wars.


If there is all joy and agreement : post that, too ! Lol
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#28 - 2012-09-18 17:29:18 UTC
A good idea deserves exposure.


How would a PvE situation as described here be balanced between the protectors of NPCs (likely many Carebears in that group) and the attackers (potentially sided by Griefers) ?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#29 - 2012-09-18 17:44:02 UTC
Erik Finnegan wrote:
A good idea deserves exposure.


How would a PvE situation as described here be balanced between the protectors of NPCs (likely many Carebears in that group) and the attackers (potentially sided by Griefers) ?

Nullify any insurance penalties associated with flagging, on the condition that the first actions were performed in line with participating in the event.

(Attackers must target and shoot at the NPC target before they can legitimately shoot at any of it's defenders to avoid risking insurance payouts on the ships they have involved)

I would suggest that the defenders register their intent by accepting a mission from the NPC vessel.

I would simplify figuring out who is who by having the group defending see the group attacking as being war flagged, and the same in reverse. So long as you shoot someone war flagged, you are not at risk with Concord or others for your actions in that context.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#30 - 2012-09-18 21:26:17 UTC
bump, this needs to happen.

Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
Winterblink
#31 - 2012-09-25 16:18:20 UTC
Erik Finnegan wrote:
Is there anyone with some criticism to what's been suggested ? Even those not interested in PvE at all should find a potential touch point here, since the attempt is to combine a PvE extension with PvP aspects.

I think it is very interesting to give high-sec more options to legitimately PvP in addition to CONCORD sanctioned wars.


If there is all joy and agreement : post that, too ! Lol

Been busy, haven't had a chance to get back to the thread in a while. :(

There has been some criticism already of it being another isk faucet, or giving people less incentive to take part in the 0.0 experience. There's a couple of points to make on that really. For one, 0.0 isn't everyone's idea of an EVE endgame anyway, so it's unreasonable to expect everyone to head that direction. Further, allowing people to take part in small one-off PVP situations might achieve the goal of giving people that first taste and getting them interested in further PVP related activities.

Gateway drug, as it were. First taste is free. :)

warp drive active
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#32 - 2012-09-28 11:56:38 UTC
Since this is PvE-related, I thought the following article on Kotaku about AI could be a good read for followers of this topic : http://kotaku.com/5947173/this-video-game-enemy-is-more-human-than-humans
Lucian Lum
Adagio Redshift
#33 - 2012-10-07 03:14:23 UTC
+1
Your idea is AWESOME and you should feel AWESOME.
Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#34 - 2012-11-12 10:12:26 UTC
I think Jester has read this and turned it into an improvement suggestion for 0.0 sovereignty by adding a 100% total system ownership where event completion counts towards and which is fought for among all alliances that participate.

Interesting !
Previous page12