These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Encourageing Players To Enjoy More Risk
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#141 - 2012-10-18 01:33:54 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
Touval Lysander wrote:
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
highonpop wrote:
Zagdul for CSM8?

\o/


Would be an excellent candidate.

You don't know Zagdul do you?


I like Zagdul :colbert:

A given. Cool

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Connaght Badasaz
Lewis and Clark Inc.
#142 - 2012-10-18 02:25:35 UTC
Opertone wrote:
Solstice Project

good trolling

High rewards do matter, but risks that are 100 times greater prevent all attempts.

It is the ratio of risk to reward - if it was 1:10 to win 100 mill ISK - this is kind of reward people may want to try.

Today it is 1:100 to win 15 mill ISK. Contrast more than 60 times!!!

Low sec mission runners need to be protected while in mission pocket!


You say you don't make enough to have a pvp gaurd. Yes, you do. You make plenty over time. So if you take the choice that is offered, then you would be able to be protected in the pocket, yes?

I believe your posts cut straight to the heart of the matter. You want as much as possible without fear or worry when getting it. In fact you would absolutely love getting protected missions that bleed isk.

No.

Take arrows in the forehead, never the back
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#143 - 2012-10-18 05:18:05 UTC
The solution, in my eyes, is to make PvE require the same (or at least very similar) fits to PvP. that way, if you do get jumped doing PvP, you have a chance to fight back instead of inevitably getting roflstomped even against bad PvP setups. Further, once the AI is changed so NPCs don't keep a laser focus on a single ship, and instead change targets, trying to gank someone doing missions or plexes could have some risk to it.

It would also add an interesting dynamic. For instance, it would be interesting to have a mission where a critical NPC could possibly warp off, so if you forget to pack a point you could end up having to travel all across the system trying to complete the mission. As another example, if you had to use combat scan probes to find a certain NPC for another mission, it would serve to partially train players on how to use them (though getting a human still takes more work since we tend to move around at the first sign of probes).
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#144 - 2012-10-18 05:52:42 UTC
Xindi Kraid wrote:
The solution, in my eyes, is to make PvE require the same (or at least very similar) fits to PvP. that way, if you do get jumped doing PvP, you have a chance to fight back instead of inevitably getting roflstomped even against bad PvP setups. Further, once the AI is changed so NPCs don't keep a laser focus on a single ship, and instead change targets, trying to gank someone doing missions or plexes could have some risk to it.

It would also add an interesting dynamic. For instance, it would be interesting to have a mission where a critical NPC could possibly warp off, so if you forget to pack a point you could end up having to travel all across the system trying to complete the mission. As another example, if you had to use combat scan probes to find a certain NPC for another mission, it would serve to partially train players on how to use them (though getting a human still takes more work since we tend to move around at the first sign of probes).

From what I understand NPC AI will only be switching to targets that actually shoot them.

As a for PvE/PvP fit for missions - try a passive Drake or Cane with a point. Does both no probs.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2012-10-24 13:45:02 UTC
Xindi Kraid wrote:
The solution, in my eyes, is to make PvE require the same (or at least very similar) fits to PvP. that way, if you do get jumped doing PvP, you have a chance to fight back instead of inevitably getting roflstomped even against bad PvP setups. Further, once the AI is changed so NPCs don't keep a laser focus on a single ship, and instead change targets, trying to gank someone doing missions or plexes could have some risk to it.

It would also add an interesting dynamic. For instance, it would be interesting to have a mission where a critical NPC could possibly warp off, so if you forget to pack a point you could end up having to travel all across the system trying to complete the mission. As another example, if you had to use combat scan probes to find a certain NPC for another mission, it would serve to partially train players on how to use them (though getting a human still takes more work since we tend to move around at the first sign of probes).


While this is a wonderful idea and I believe CCP has said they were already working on this, it doesn't solve the issue I brought up so this isn't the solution to what I've proposed in the original post.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#146 - 2012-10-24 14:19:40 UTC
Xindi Kraid wrote:
The solution, in my eyes, is to make PvE require the same (or at least very similar) fits to PvP. that way, if you do get jumped doing PvP, you have a chance to fight back instead of inevitably getting roflstomped even against bad PvP setups. Further, once the AI is changed so NPCs don't keep a laser focus on a single ship, and instead change targets, trying to gank someone doing missions or plexes could have some risk to it.

It would also add an interesting dynamic. For instance, it would be interesting to have a mission where a critical NPC could possibly warp off, so if you forget to pack a point you could end up having to travel all across the system trying to complete the mission. As another example, if you had to use combat scan probes to find a certain NPC for another mission, it would serve to partially train players on how to use them (though getting a human still takes more work since we tend to move around at the first sign of probes).



This has been suggested, requested and demanded many times over the years. Glad to add you to the list of supporters!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Geligdio Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2012-10-24 15:23:14 UTC
James 315 wrote:
Nerf highsec PvE into the ground tbh. Smile


+1

Thanks
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#148 - 2012-10-24 16:40:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ioci
Adding more wealth to Null won't draw people to Null. It will just make the people in Null now, wealthier.

Go in to any Null system there will be 20 Anoms. 2 "good" ones and 18 "junk" ones. Meaning they can't be kite soloed in a Tier 3 battle cruiser. There is plenty of content. Much like high sec, nobody CBA to do most of it. CCP are their own worse enemy. They add to the game, add to the game, then nerf it to extinction.

- The cement wall between PvE ships and PvP ships and their fits is a problem but tbh it's moot because most content in demand is solo. Solo in EVE, especially in Null is certain death. That said, see the 18 "junk" anoms. Nobody is getting fleets up to do them unless it's a bait fleet and in general a complete waste of time in the Isk/hr game.

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Christopher Caldaris
Caldaris Enterprises LLC
#149 - 2012-10-24 17:35:47 UTC
I don't want more risk. Hi Sec should be just that, highly secured. It's like living in a populated city, you shouldn't have to worry every time you go out of your house, if you are going to be killed or not. On the off chance that you are the victim of a crime the police step in to help...usually.

High Security needs to stay how it is. People who want risk will go to lower security areas. I have more fun flying around High Security checking out planets and belts, and mining some ore. I don't want to be killed every 5 seconds.
SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#150 - 2012-10-25 03:22:09 UTC
Christopher Caldaris wrote:

High Security needs to stay how it is. People who want risk will go to lower security areas. I have more fun flying around High Security checking out planets and belts, and mining some ore. I don't want to be killed every 5 seconds.


Do you really think you get killed every 5 seconds in low and null?

I regularly move my carrier all around lowsec, even the scummier parts and my crappy little cyno frigate is tied next to a station with a 10 minute before I can dock cooldown and a big "Bang me in my tender parts" warp in displayed on the overview of everyone in system with me.

I've only lost one Cyno Frigate in lowsec in a year.

In Nullsec most of my deaths involved me biting off more than I could chew OR doing something dumb, OR being AFK at the wrong time. Occasionally fleet battles get me blown up too.

I mean you are honestly clueless, it's almost cute except you think your opinion should count when you have no clue what you are talking about.
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#151 - 2012-10-25 04:34:55 UTC
Christopher Caldaris wrote:
I don't want more risk. Hi Sec should be just that, highly secured. It's like living in a populated city, you shouldn't have to worry every time you go out of your house, if you are going to be killed or not. On the off chance that you are the victim of a crime the police step in to help...usually.

High Security needs to stay how it is. People who want risk will go to lower security areas. I have more fun flying around High Security checking out planets and belts, and mining some ore. I don't want to be killed every 5 seconds.

In 0.0, I know who my enemy is. NBSI is the best defensive system imaginable.
In 0.0, I'm forced to fight, knowing that if I lose my ship, it's covered.
In 0.0, if someone who is my enemy is 10 jumps out, I know about it.
In 0.0, if I do get in a fight, my mates will be there.
In 0.0, the police (your mates) will make every attempt to stop the bad guys.

In highsec, everyone is a possible threat.
In highsec, I'm forced to fight (by the guy sneaking up on my Hulk with a Brutix). My loss is complete.
In highsec, someone could be my enemy right next to me, I won't know that until I am dead.
In highsec, if I do get in a fight, my mates will run away.
In highsec, the police (Concord) will put tape around the scene of the crime.

Highsec is safe?

Whoever said that has never been in highsec.

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
#152 - 2012-10-25 05:32:15 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
A 50M ship price tag is no excuse whatsoever to avoid risk.

That's true. I think a lot of new players aren't accustomed to losing ships. They have no real desire to go out and get themselves blown up. I think it's a pride thing because other games feed them the idea they are some great hero. They come to EvE with big ideas about taking over the universe and perhaps they don't want to tarnish their reputation by getting killed or something. I think new players might feel some embarrassment and humiliation in being blown up by another player.



In my several forays into just 0.4 space I have been webbed and insta-killed every single time - even before I can get target lock on the ship(s) ganking me.

I don't mind the risk of losing a ship in combat, its part of the game and I have found ISK easy to earn in-game or to purchase.

What I do mind is jumping into a system and setting course for the next gate only to be webbed and killed instantly - every single time. I'd like to at least have a chance to bloody a nose or two but instead it's insta-kill and, about half the time, capsule kill.

The Stargates are major choke points and provide easy PvP kills for players who prefer to not have a challenge. Just camp the gate and pop whatever comes through. To me, protecting gates would probably be sufficient through low-sec space. I don't care if it is CONCORD or some sort of tracking disrputor field around the gate that makes targeting ships nearly impossible. Once I can get through the gate and into a system, I can take it from there.

But, I still try. Smaller, faster, cheaper ships and reading the forums.

Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
Yasmina Conditor
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2012-10-25 06:51:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Yasmina Conditor
These days it seems so many think isk/hr and worry about their k/d ratio rather than relaxing having fun.
And in most cases the only people that go into a fight in low and null is when they know they can win that to me is not risk.

These days the zerg mentallity ruined most mmo's
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#154 - 2012-10-25 06:58:33 UTC
Touval Lysander wrote:
Christopher Caldaris wrote:
I don't want more risk. Hi Sec should be just that, highly secured. It's like living in a populated city, you shouldn't have to worry every time you go out of your house, if you are going to be killed or not. On the off chance that you are the victim of a crime the police step in to help...usually.

High Security needs to stay how it is. People who want risk will go to lower security areas. I have more fun flying around High Security checking out planets and belts, and mining some ore. I don't want to be killed every 5 seconds.

In 0.0, I know who my enemy is. NBSI is the best defensive system imaginable.
In 0.0, I'm forced to fight, knowing that if I lose my ship, it's covered.
In 0.0, if someone who is my enemy is 10 jumps out, I know about it.
In 0.0, if I do get in a fight, my mates will be there.
In 0.0, the police (your mates) will make every attempt to stop the bad guys.

In highsec, everyone is a possible threat.
In highsec, I'm forced to fight (by the guy sneaking up on my Hulk with a Brutix). My loss is complete.
In highsec, someone could be my enemy right next to me, I won't know that until I am dead.
In highsec, if I do get in a fight, my mates will run away.
In highsec, the police (Concord) will put tape around the scene of the crime.

Highsec is safe?

Whoever said that has never been in highsec.

Statistically an exhumer in high sec is one of the safest places to be in EVE.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#155 - 2012-10-25 07:10:07 UTC
Needs to be said over and over for Nullbears and Lowsucks.

Destroy Hi-Sec, destroy EVE.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#156 - 2012-10-25 07:12:55 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Needs to be said over and over for Nullbears and Lowsucks.

Destroy Hi-Sec, destroy EVE.

Adding back a bit of risk will not destroy high sec.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#157 - 2012-10-25 08:08:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Solstice Project wrote:

Gotta love people who have no actual experience, believing that their opinion is in any way valid ...

Hello, Genius ! The reward does not matter ! CCP has tried times and times again.

It's NOT about the money ! Those who don't want to move to lowsec simply do NOT want to risk their ships !

.


Actually no they haven't, time and again they nerf the income streams, but I'm ok with Nullsec being worthless since they've made it virtually impossible to catch any ratter who's not sleeping, so if its just as safe (if not safer since you can wall of a system in bubbles) than Empire I see no reason why it should make more money than empire.

Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:


The Stargates are major choke points and provide easy PvP kills for players who prefer to not have a challenge. Just camp the gate and pop whatever comes through. To me, protecting gates would probably be sufficient through low-sec space. I don't care if it is CONCORD or some sort of tracking disrputor field around the gate that makes targeting ships nearly impossible. Once I can get through the gate and into a system, I can take it from there.

.

Thats because this is all the PVP that CCP has left us. You say a challenge, I say that CCP has removed most incentives to fight in the game, and made it entirely too easy to avoid combat should that be what you want. The net result is that outside of fleet fights, which 7 out of 10 times will result in blue balls once the enemy learns your fleet might beat theirs, or your fc learns their fleet will beat yours, is to camp gates and jump bridges. Because at least on those you KNOW somebody will eventually come through that you have a chance of blowing up.

If you're mad about that, tell CCP to give the PVP guys some goals that don't require large fleets, that small gangs can accomplish, tell them to return reasons to roam in small and medium sized gangs and then you can go back to crying about gate camps. Right now thats one of the few ways to force PVP in this game.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#158 - 2012-10-25 14:12:54 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:


Thats because this is all the PVP that CCP has left us. You say a challenge, I say that CCP has removed most incentives to fight in the game, and made it entirely too easy to avoid combat should that be what you want. The net result is that outside of fleet fights, which 7 out of 10 times will result in blue balls once the enemy learns your fleet might beat theirs, or your fc learns their fleet will beat yours, is to camp gates and jump bridges. Because at least on those you KNOW somebody will eventually come through that you have a chance of blowing up.




You won eve

and I am impressed.

This is true

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
svenska flicka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-10-25 14:20:43 UTC
You are in FA a bi... member of the CFC, what the hell are you complaining about?

Oh you want more ISK than you already got and can make out in CFC space at less risk than now, christ, you are worse than miners in highsec.
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#160 - 2012-10-25 14:32:31 UTC
we just ninja'd a nightmare bpc out of a plex in like 5 mins the other night in some back ass empty nullsec. you guys have enough systems to rat or plex. quit your bitching.