These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Open Letter: Suggestion to EVE Valkyrie Team for practical EVE/Valkyrie Link...

Author
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-09-12 20:01:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
The following post is going to be crazy long, but it stems from an interview with Jon Lander (CCP Unifex) who, acting as temporary executive producer for EVE Valkyrie, in my mind had the correct emphasis on getting a product out where the core dogfighting gameplay was excellent, took advantage of the Oculus tech, and released relatively quickly.

However, reading between the lines on the interview leads me to think that to achieve these goals, the idea might mean to eschew integration with EVE Online for the first iteration. I understand this, as the lessons of DUST's extensive development time, combined with the feeling that core FPS gameplay suffered a bit due to the emphasis on creating a complex EVE-like system with integration to Tranquility.

Thinking about it, however, I have a design suggestion on making E:V integrated with EVE Online without necessarily sacrificing the goals stated, and getting a version out the door that does have some real tie, beyond lore, with Tranquility.

This is food for thought and comes from a place of being insanely excited about EVE Valkyrie and wanting it to be the space dogfigther to rule them all. Although a former developer I'm under no illusion that I know more about game design than CCP, nor assume that this game design suggestion is perfect. Nor that they would ever simply adopt it -- or that I'm not simply shouting down a well by posting it here. I am hoping it provides with some ideas, should CCP read this, and that there might be some helpful suggestions. Also hoping this gets ideas for simple integration that is DOABLE into the ether and encourages the debate.

I also feel this approach could be expanded upon later to tie the universes together more tightly.

Quote:
TL;DR: Note that there is a summary for each of the four "Challenges and Solutions" posts on this EVE Valkyrie proposal that provides a quick summary of the points, with details and supporting points in the rest of the post. I'm hoping these executive summaries are intriguing enough to read the rest in each post, since the devil is in the details, but realize that a mega-post like needs a quick way to get the idea
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2013-09-12 20:02:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Challenge 1:
Let smaller fighter-type ships affect New Eden in general, and sov/fleet engagements in particular, without requiring a change in ship and fleet mechanics in EVE Online nor overtaxing Tranquility.

Proposed Solution:

Quote:
TL;DR Summary:
"Sansha technology that allows for systemwide effects has been harnessed by capsuleer corporations and empires. These new deployable structures give off massive hyperspatial distortions, not allowing larger ships to approach. Smaller, manually controlled vessels however can navigate these eddies. It is up to this new breed to defend these structures, and take out those of the enemy"


Details and Supporting Points: Basically, new types of deployables that are like other sov structures. In Empire space, these would be NPC units similar to deadspace structures. In Null, they are a new kind of sov unit able to be built and deployed like Customs Offices etc. complete with reinforcement timers etc. The difference is that once activated, the "hyperspatial distortion" would act a lot like a POS shield, keeping EVE:O ships from approaching, thus creating an instanced "arena" in that system for the E:V pilots. The number of "Hotzones" can also be scaled as player numbers change for E:V also rather than the fixed number of "maps" as in DUST.

In Empire, these arenas allow for PvE via pirates, much like EVE:O, who either defend pirate towers or want to take out empire towers. Not every system has these effects (to keep from spreading the playerbase), but instead would work a bit like sansha incursions where there are hotzones each day/hour/etc., with a certain hotzone being active until destroyed. Initially, these npc-based effects in hisec could be set to either have very minimal field effects for E:O pilots on minor aspects so as not to interfere too much, or even simply be a incursion-like notification that one of these towers is active in system, and the status of the "battle" to control it, but with no effects. In this way, it still integrates with the universe but doesn't impact EVE players greatly.

In Sov contests (or FW), it creates field effects for the whole system that are noticeable enough to provide incentive to defend or take out. Some could be industrial, like yield on mining or production, and some military like providing additional scramble range or resists for the team with the structure deployed. However, not enough that it could singlehandedly turn the tide of battle.

This would allow E:V pilots to have appreciable affects on the larger New Eden environment without need for direct interaction with the E:O large ships, and also allow the use of battle server --> Tranquility architecture similarly used for DUST.
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-09-12 20:03:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Challenge 2:
Create a way for E:V pilots to have character progression that makes sense in the larger New Eden universe, but yet doesn't have potential to derail the E:O complex economy. Any system that relies on ISK flow between titles slows development as there is too much potential fallout.

Proposed Solution:

Quote:

TL;DR Summary
Create an incentive system that isn't ISK for E:V (at least not on initial launch), but which can still be affected by their actions in the larger New Eden universe, is independent from E:O, but which capsuleers can both impact and use to interact with/incentivize E:V pilots (and gauge their "desirability" for defend/attack contracts).

This can be accomplished with what I'll just call "merits". At its heart would be the approach that the deployables E:V pilots are fighting/defending are built by either NPCs (in Empire) or E:O players. Also, the fighter ships themselves are items built by EVE:O players and are objects in the same way drones or fighters are now, but accessed by E:V pilots once assigned into an instanced "hot zone" arena map rather than using AI.


Details and Supporting Points: E:V players start in a basic ship with a base number of "merits". Unlike capsuleers, the conceit isn't that these are their ships. They are more like navy pilots — the ships they have access to isn't a function of their money/ISK, but what they are "Certified" to fly. E:V pilots earn variable amounts of "merits" through participating in missions (both PvE and PvP), winning, not abandoning a mission etc. Also basic stats such as wins, assists, staying on the field (aka not bailing), friendly-fire/awoxing attempts etc. are put on their "service record".

Merits are redeemable for "Certifications" which allows you to fly better/different role ships. Once cashing in these merits, you no longer have them, but your total lifetime merit accumulation is part of your "service record". The conceit of your pilot's cabin isn't a hangar etc. (since you aren't buying ships but certifications) -- but you could still ship spin by accessing either a simulation or looking out onto the "bay" at ships for which you are certified.

PvE encounters, or PvP in which the factions for which you are fighting are NPC corps or Factions (FW) are more straightforward to implement (see the idea of hotzones above), and are basically instant matches.

Player Corps wouldn't need to contract specific E:V corps or have them in their corporations. When corps deploy fighters to the contested system, players are assigned/matched to those "fighter ships" based on their certifications (aka E:V pilots certified in the ships being deployed). Corporations could filter for certain additional requirements, including a whitelist wherein they will only use pilots form a certain alliance/corp, a whitelist of preferred alliances, a blacklist of denied alliance members, service record stats such as attempted awoxing or leaving battles, etc., or even pure lifetime merit points earned.

There would be a (not massive) ISK sink cost to deploying fighters, similar to the system for jump fuel etc., and filtering for service record stats, etc., adds to the cost so that the more particular you are, the more the deployment costs. Also there would be a way to make the filters absolute or preferred (which could control whether, if enough pilots who meet your criteria aren't available, do you just fill the roster with one's who fit 90% of filters, then 80% etc or is the launch simply scrubbed).

E:V pilots would also have the option of filtering their deployments, anywhere from total freelancer (aka fight for anyone), faction (for FW matches), types of battles (all, FW only, corp battles only), whitelist of preferred corporations (wherein those offers are accepted first and/or you don't accept matches fighting against that group), blacklists (aka you won't deploy for that group and fights against that group are preferred) etc.

Likewise, although the system would be meant to make it much simpler than contracts so it is semi-automatic with filters, it still allows corps to stick with specific groups. It also makes both EVE and E:V pilots care about things like certifications and merits. Likewise, a corp can look at the stats, and if they see reports of pilot(s) doing things like idling etc., they can block that specific pilot, alliance or corp.

This system means that resources stay within EVE with simply adding new kinds of modules/units to the market, but there is no currency flow between the games — yet merits have both a tangible effect on E:V player progression (Certifications determining launch ship eligibilities and merits/service record = better deployments) and E:O decision making.
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-09-12 20:04:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Challenge 3:
Don't require fundamental changes in mechanics for EVE Online while linking to EVE: Valkyrie and still making the connection tangible.

Proposed Solution:

Quote:
TL;DR Summary:
E:V Jumpfighter battles are instanced arenas in the E:V client, generated either by NPC factions or initiated by E:O player action (a special POS asset deployed in EVE). Once these "hot zone" maps are generated, they appear in EVE Online as placeholders in "space" to capsuleers indicating the nominal location of the instanced arena that exists on the E:V client battleserver -- with art assets and lore to make it fit into the EVE universe. The communication between the two games consists of battle status reports within that solar system. E:V would experience the space as a specific "map" bounded by the "bubble" defining the edges of the anomaly.


Details and Supporting Points: Already, I proposed the idea of deployable structures creating system-wide effects as a strategic asset, but which the larger E:O ships couldn't approach because of "hyperspatial turbulence" (or whatever better lore reason). This means that, while in the same solar system, fighter battles would be physically apart or instanced-off from fleet battles, a bit like DUST battles on planets have minimal direct interaction with space, except that the results are being reported. This would be similar, but without even orbitals or tags. On the EVE side, the battle report would be something similar to an incursion status bar, with number of ships left on each side, structure of the deployable, system effect strength, displayed. E:O ships could approach the deployable structure once activated, but basically would hit the equivalent of a POS shield. Preventing ships from looking inside could be something like the V'Ger cloud from Star Trek the Motion Picture, in that its a visual effect depicting the hyperspatial disturbance. Thus, no rendering of the action inside. Fundamentally, once activated this POS in the EVE client is simply a placeholder marking that there is an instanced arena linked to this nominal location, with gloss to make it look like an inaccessible spatial anomaly.

In E:V, its simply an arena, without even the battle status displayed since your attention would be needed on the dogfights. After and/or before in your pilot's cabin, perhaps battle status and sov changes, much like the captain's quarters but for that system only, display. The conceit of a hyperspatial anomaly surrounding the ship makes it like a mini-wormhole. There are possibility for system specific effects, and interesting environments based on the premise that this hyperspace bubble is pulling in celestial debris and objects, including asteroid/meteorite fields, wreckage of large-scale EVE:O ships from ship graveyards (thus allowing E:V pilots to fly around models of their huge big brothers).

Later, post release, if you want to even get crazier, you could do things like this hyperspatial bubble has pulled in active E:O navy and pirate ships, allowing large ships to be active parts of the environment while still being NPCs — like firing big cannons and other environmental obstacles. It can also explain away why after the structure is destroyed and the bubble collapses, these NPC objects go away -- because they are "folded" back to their original locations.

In terms of deployment, the system could be done that does not interfere with E:O fundamentals. The deployable POSs have small jumpgate bridges, and consume a special kind of fuel block to jump-in x number of fighters per unit of fuel up to a limit of fuel capacity for the POS. For attackers, logistics ships (or whatever) could have a special launcher -- or simply an item in the cargohold -- that creates a fighter-scale "jump bridge" to the system, simply requiring on-grid with the POS and "firing into" the cloud or object like a probe. Again, this would require jump-fuel blocks. This POS is on a reinforcement timer just like anything else, except EVE:O ships can't directly POS shoot this specific type -- they need to rely on the E:V fighters duking it out in an instanced "map" on the E:V client with the result/consequence reported back to the E:O client and impacting the system fleet booster/damp effects.

From the E:V fighters perspective, they get in and available deployments that fit filters are available (kind of like DUST). Perhaps the conceit is that the pilots quarters are in either system stations or near jumpgates. The "launch tubes" are basically jumpgates/bridges so that whey you hop in and launch, you are being launched across hyperspace into the deployment system.

Pilots can choose a home system, but this wouldn't fundamentally matter due to the jump bridge conceit. It's just cosmetic for racial quarters and/or local chat. You can limit it to one station/system (that has stations) since you could posit only one station/system has jumptube launcher capability. You could even limit the number of systems on that basis -- though I would put them in at least one per region. Like CQ in EVE, you'd only need the racial variants of each, so assets are limited.

Since the pilot's cabin module and dogfighting module are separate, the Pilot's Cabin could theoretically use the same Carbon engine (allowing while in station characters of equivalent fidelity to EVE Online) and one day share WiS functionality if that ever comes (assuming its easily adaptable to Oculus Rift).

Optionally, you could make fuel costs relate to distance giving advantage to closer pilots, but this system would be too complex and go against a mission to simplify it without the daunting EVE density on the part of E:V pilots.

Again, this system of deployment limits EVE Online's exposure to issues from the new game to that of the changes required for something like PI, while creating a system where it feels integrated to E:V pilots, and effects New Eden.
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-09-12 20:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Challenge 4:
Keep the experience quick and arcade like for EVE: Valkyrie players and as little time between startup and being in a dogfight as possible.

Proposed Solution:

Quote:
TL;DR Summary:
This part reviews various details that would allow E:V to remain streamlined and arcade-like while not conflicting with the ethos of New Eden. Includes quick-find system for matches based on merit points/service record, Empire, FW and Corp battles as a "progression" of activities, possible solutions for AWOXing or friendly fire given the finite maps, how Certification points might affect ship aquisition and fitting, and making "jumpfighters" seperate from existing assets in E:O


Details and Supporting Points: Entirely from E:V perspective, Empire based towers are PvE arenas, much like rooms for EVE Online, with the exception that for E:O players, a "placeholder" for the battleserver would be able to seen as celestials, like a tower etc., but not approached beyond a certain "event horizon".

The system would determine the hotzones, like incursions, as mission sites. The number active at any one time determined by demand, with new hotzones able to pop once existing ones are full. In these, E:V fight Serpentis, Sansha etc. Some hotzones focus on defending a friendly Empire NPC nexus tower, some with taking out pirate nexus towers. These matches are instant in that once a user logs in, they can simply select from available hotzones, or instant deploy. These matches would earn Merits (fewer than PvP), but not items like victory marks on service records, etc.

— perhaps they must do a certain number of PvE missions first before they can get into FW or Corporation battles to ensure they train, and have enough certifications to get beyond the starter ship.

FW would be hotzones in lowsec systems, deployments on behalf of NPC empire factions, but in which you are PvPing against other players. For these, you must choose a faction (not necessarily your starting faction), with perhaps a cooldown period to change factions, as well as reputation. People would be matchmade in FW hotzones with others in similar certification level ships.

For both Empire ratting Hotzones and FW, while their outcome could have minor system effects for EVE Players (simply to make E:V have an impact on EVE) these would not be game-breakingly severe, nor as onerous as Sansha system effects.

Corp warfare is described above. Again, this would have a matchmaking system and its system effects more important for fleet engagements.

###

Items like friendly fire can be easily disabled to assist in making the experience more straightforward through the simple premise that a locking computer won't fire on your allies. However, the system could record attempts at friendly locks and/or AWOXing attempts would be logged by the system on the service record, and perpetrators able to be filtered out of calls by non-NPC corps creating disincentive. This is in response to the fact that E:V matches would theoretically have the same issues as DUST since E:V battles would have caps similar to the way DUST matches do -- and unlike EVE Online does in a practical sense.

###

Certifications were proposed to be used as ways to qualify to fly certain ships when deployed (aka assigned a ship that the E:O player obtains and initiates engagement with -- or in the case of an NPC battle, where you are assumed to die and be reanimated and the ship lost with you only being eligible for a specific number of ships per battle.) This system makes it a bit more acrade-like (the goal) but yet makes sense in the context of the premise that you are a "contract pilot". In the case of corp, they pay for the equipment and your clone assigned pilot (assuming sufficiently certified), and in the case of NPC battles, it creates a system a bit more forgiving/like most more casual games while maintaining this conceit.

Certification could be as general or granular as deemed fitting -- with my suggestion being that it starts with a more straightforward system at launch for casual fun: certain certifications = eligibility for certain ship types with those ship types having specific capabilities, ammo-types, etc. It keeps the progression tree simple.

Later, E:V could begin getting into certifications for specific modules and components, which then are fitted to certain ships they are qualified to fly. However, I wouldn't launch with this, and instead make that the equivalent of a T1/T2 idea. T1 ships at launch, and which stay throughout the game, are fixed-spec ships. Later T2 type fighters are modular, with the pilot being able to determine his/her configuration based on certificates. When the E:O pilots initiate a Hotzone engagement, they are specifying the ship type, but the module combination is up to the pilot if they were using T2 fighters.

Adding a T2 later would mean that even after introduction, the T1 still provides fast-in and flying action for beginners, while expanding the possibilities for vetrans looking for a deeper experience. But that, I suggest, is a E:V 2.0 thing. The good thing about this T1/T2 idea is that it makes integrating these fighters as EVE assets (like existing drones or fighters) simple in that its maintaining the same T1/T2 distinction. At first, on the EVE side, E:O players would only see T1 jumpfighters on the market.

###

Jumpfighters could be a distinct item on the EVE Online side, versus drones or fighters with different deployment mechanics etc., allowing existing fighters to stay in the game on carriers as what they are now, which is glorified drones. Thus no existing systems are broken, but rather a new kind of Sov asset with its own mechanics that integrates with Valkyrie is created. NPC/Empire wise, functionally this system simply introduces a new kind of "incursion" type that integrates with E:V rather than using Sansha AI.
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-09-12 20:09:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
CONCLUSION

Quote:
TL;DR Summary:
This is a closing argument with some discussion of monetization. Basically, although it seems to conflict with the New Eden ethos, the proposal creates a game with little to no economy, but this works with the goal of simplicity, and also fits the premise proposed here, since the idea is the E:V pilots are military attached to E:O NPC or player entities. I feel the proposed game design has greater potential than DUST to bring both existing and a DISTINCT playerbase into the EVE Universe by giving them spaceships and a real participation in the larger universe without having to slog through the complex economy and logistics we love about E:O but which puts-off many who would otherwise love to participate.


*Note: these suggestions basically mean that E:V would have functionally no economy. All the assets are simply:

(a) NPC based: Jumpfighters and E:V rats generated by NPC factions aren't items in the EVE economy, but only exist for the duration of the engagement. In fact, they only exist in E:O as data in "battle status" updates since they are never rendered in the E:O client. or...

(b) EVE Online based player generated assets: These are items built by E:O players to be used in their engagements piloted by E:V players. Once launched into a hotzone, this asset is suspended from the E:O client and an equivalent asset assigned in E:V. Upon completion, if the asset is not destroyed it returns as an inventory item to the E:O player. In the E:O client, jumpfighters have no behavior but are simply inventory/cargo items, like dancers or Quafe, or function like "ammo" -- serving as "markers" for E:V ships).

This lack of an economy would be intentional to maintain that "arcade like" simplicity.

And while on paper this would seem very non New Eden, it does conceptually fit into the conceit that was suggested here: that this one is more based on being part of either the military (or private military) for the NPC entities or for E:O player organizations than being an Empyrean. In this context, it's logical for the "progression currency" to be merits, certification and reputation points rather than ISK. In the military, merits and appopriate training (aka "certification") determine the toys they give you access to. In RL, you have to have certain qualifications to touch an F-16, and access to it is your reward. Top Gun pilots don't buy their own jetcraft.

One item is that you could perhaps cash-in merits for Aurum instead of certifications etc., allowing for a small, closed AUR economy.

A nonexistant or small closed economy makes cosmetic cash shop items able to be implemented without impact on the main EVE Online economy. Since pilots are certified in this proposal versus buying their ships, an item store -- if its not B2P -- could focus on vanity items like decals or customization. This could be handled of course through Aurum -- and its a better use of it in this game, since cosmetic/style items like being able to put callsigns and stencil logos on ships (explained in lore through nanopaint that keys to the pilot on any ship they enter etc., you guys are creative), custom flight suits, radio call voices etc. would naturally fit better than in E:O.

Also, eschewing the complex economy and some of the more RTS-like elements of EVE ensures they maintain their own niches and distinct gameplay style, and that Valkyrie doesn't cannibalize EVE Online's strengths and vice versa.

A simplified economy with no industry or complex mechanics also has, I believe, a potentially great effect to expanding the EVE Universe player base: it gives people who love the fact that its a player-driven, large, complex economy universe and want to exist in it -- but DON'T necessarily want to deal with the complexity, the market, the logistics that this involves opportunity to participate. Some people want to be Maverick and not Ceasar. Using this, people can say "I was there. I was part of it. I contributed" without that layer.

In conclusion, I've read countless "I love the EVE universe and would love to be part of it, but I just want to be a grunt flying by the seat of my pants" comments on every generally distributed EVE news story. Valkyrie can more directly scratch the itch for people interested in EVE than DUST because its also spaceships. Also, DUST managed to import a lot of that daunting complexity to the FPS. I say this as someone who likes DUST but recognizes that its a long road for that title before it reaches its potential -- Valkyrie has the potential to click immediately. However, even in a simplified form, I feel a link to the living New Eden will make it a far more compelling and sticky experience and build on the fantastic OR and twitch gameplay.
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
#7 - 2013-09-13 03:28:31 UTC
Tarn Kugisa
Kugisa Dynamics
#8 - 2013-09-13 04:28:41 UTC
I like the ideas, but we srsly need a tl;dr

Be polite. Be efficient. Have a plan to troll everyone you meet - KuroVolt

Luc Chastot
#9 - 2013-09-13 05:56:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Luc Chastot
CCP needs a way to integrate Valkyrie into EVE that can be done quickly and without much actual coding. The way I see it, EVE Valkyrie should be a CONCORD-sponsored, elite VR sport that only very select people can practice, be them capsuleers or augmented humans who have undergone the same surgical procedures that allow capsuleers to integrate with ships.

Mechanics-wise, this would allow EVE players to use their characters in EVE Valkyrie and benefit from whatever CCP considers would make sense, without giving them much of an edge over non-EVE players (augmented humans). Lore-wise, there already are simulation tanks in EVE where the different factions test their ships in controlled environments.

A number of things could be done inside both games to make their connection more notorious and relevant, without the need to make major changes:

- Make jump gate screens better looking and larger, so EVE Valkyrie information can be fancily displayed in them for people to see.
- Games are basically sets of rules that limit the players, so this is the perfect excuse to make Valkyrie less sandboxy. Or not at all.
- Interactions could be one-way ISK transfers, trained skills affecting Valkyrie, medals/trophies that display in EVE your achievements in Valkyrie, contacts accesible from both games etc. and any limits CCP wants to impose on them.
- Sports tend to develop their own culture, and there are usually groups that form around specific teams or players. This is the perfect chance for CCP to plant the seeds of a very competitive meta, where stars rise and fall constantly. Think Roman chariot racing in the Circus Maximus.
- Probably the most difficult thing to do would be to integrate Twitch into EVE (client-side), so EVE players could watch CCP-sposored tournaments in the comfort of their CQs (make them relevant).
- Most importantly to really make Valkyrie feel like a fancy sport, allow it to be shiny, over-the-top, fashionable and any other similar adjective you can think of. It has to look pretentious and dirty, like Dennis Rodman.

Edit: Oh, and allow us to buy EVE Valkyrie with PLEX!

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Altered Ego
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-09-13 06:02:52 UTC
+1 for the TL;DR at lest.

Also, OP needs to check the meaning of 'conceit' vs. 'concept'.
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-09-13 11:06:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Altered Ego wrote:
+1 for the TL;DR at lest.

Also, OP needs to check the meaning of 'conceit' vs. 'concept'.


I appreciate the response to the post, especially considering it was long and you obviously did read it despite being tl;dr. I appreciate it. Although I did mean conceit in this definition:


Conceit:

-an organizing theme or concept
"He found the conceit for his film early"

- a result of mental activity : thought (2)


- Mirriam-Webster Dictionary.


I looked it up because you were the second person to mention it and I second guessed whether, to quote Inigo Montoya, "that word means what I think it means".
Pon Teyuen
Perkone
Caldari State
#12 - 2013-09-13 11:09:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Pon Teyuen
Tarn Kugisa wrote:
I like the ideas, but we srsly need a tl;dr


Noted. In fairness to me, however, the first line is that the post is "crazy long".

Added TL;DR summaries at the top of each individual section to help and hopefully get the "gist" of each point. Couldn't think of a way to make one for everything that itself wouldn't be long.

The idea of this post, crazy long as it is, was to post a thought out design concept that addresses the issues of linking the games (which can't necessarily be covered without detail) and hope someone at CCP at least reads it -- because I do fear that the alternate solution given the priorities might be no initial integration at all.