These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Permanent, soul crushing loss

Author
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#1 - 2014-01-21 21:24:46 UTC
With the goal of encouraging change in the universe and force engagements, or at least something interesting to happen out in 0.0, why not blow parts of it up on occasion? The best parts of eve are permanent, soul crushing loss...this increases that at the same time as forcing change.

On a somewhat rare occasion some sun could go nova. It would result in the complete destruction of the constellation.

All matter in these areas would be destroyed. I suppose the idea of having some systems just be burnt to a crisp but the structures being salvageable or something... There'd be no working stargate though.

There would be a period of time to react and bug out. The star would show signs of going nova before actually doing so. Ignore these signs and you lose...possibly everything.

Medical clones in a system that goes nova would be destroyed. There'd be no way to recover them. If you're going AFK a while you would contract your medical clone to a mobile facility as even hisec systems can go....naturally (more below). When the change came into effect all clones would be moved to such a facility...there'd be a one shot free move to anywhere. This is to keep people from coming back after years to find their main gone. Anyone that moves their clone though is SOL if they don't take care of it. There should be both NPC and PC mobile clone arrays. Would probably need to make it impossible for a PC one to be destroyed...at least in the first iteration because I imagine a lot of butt-hurt if one got blown up on its way out (I'd be cool with it myself).

The new, buildable stargates would be used to make WH exploration a pioneering effort to replace exploded systems. Systems could be sold to concord or kept lawless...not sure what you'd do for lowsec but that could be ironed out.

A new, very expensive ship/weapon pair would be created to explode an enemy's star. It would require some months of training and completely destroy the character. It would cause a chain reaction to begin in the star that would result in it going nova within some sufficient amount of time. It should be difficult to get the ship to its destination, requiring either massive force or great ingenuity. It should be possible, but far from easy, for a smaller alliance to destroy a coalition's home system if they're not vigilant.

This weapon would not be capable of firing in low/high. Lawful space only explodes naturally, and it would be a fairly rare event...but would in fact happen, which could be cool because it could split the universe and there'd need to be explorers and industrials to connect it again.

Sure, it needs a lot more work. I just thought of it today. It could be devastatingly destructive to the game if implemented naively, but could be a huge amount of fun if done right.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2014-01-21 21:28:57 UTC
Why, if I let my sub lapse for a month or two, should I lose everything I own with no possibility of recovery?
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#3 - 2014-01-21 21:32:12 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Why, if I let my sub lapse for a month or two, should I lose everything I own with no possibility of recovery?


Because you didn't put your clone in a safe place. You have opportunity to do so in order to avoid that destruction.

Could make it easier for the lazy by making all NPC clone facilities capable of moving your clone if needed.
NearNihil
Jump Drive Appreciation Society
#4 - 2014-01-21 21:35:43 UTC
Ok so the risk is losing literally everything. At random. With no counter. What's the reward?
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#5 - 2014-01-21 21:36:47 UTC
This seems like an awful idea. What part of this makes the game more fun? We're talking about playing a game right?
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-01-21 21:39:03 UTC
It's a fun concept. But this is still a game. RL happens, people have to go away for indeterminate amounts of time, with or without warning. Without an 'RL failsafe' of some sort, this idea can't be anything more than a cool concept.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#7 - 2014-01-21 21:41:31 UTC
NearNihil wrote:
Ok so the risk is losing literally everything. At random. With no counter. What's the reward?


Decreased stagnation.

There's plenty of counters I described and I'm sure more can be thought of. You got bug-out time, facilities to contract out your clone moving... The reward of taking the risk not to make that contract would be the advantages of 0.0 and slight amount of saved isk per clone.
Secret Squirrell
Allied Press Intergalactic
#8 - 2014-01-21 21:42:28 UTC
My problem with it is all the people who relied on station indestructibility, parked their assets/clone in one knowing it was safe, and then left the game for an extended period of time. Your pulling the rug out from underthem, for no really good reason. What could be interesting is if a new area of space opened that had such a risk, but the harm of applying it to existing space is too great.
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#9 - 2014-01-21 21:45:18 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
It's a fun concept. But this is still a game. RL happens, people have to go away for indeterminate amounts of time, with or without warning. Without an 'RL failsafe' of some sort, this idea can't be anything more than a cool concept.


Perhaps the addition then of a clone backup.

Maybe the idea of complete material destruction is enough and the clone idea is too much. I like the idea of having to completely reset if you screw up really bad, but yeah...needs something for the people that get hit by busses and can't log in for months. I think anything short of that though could be avoidable by just flipping to a mobile clone before you leave on vacation.
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#10 - 2014-01-21 21:48:45 UTC
Secret Squirrell wrote:
My problem with it is all the people who relied on station indestructibility, parked their assets/clone in one knowing it was safe, and then left the game for an extended period of time. Your pulling the rug out from underthem, for no really good reason. What could be interesting is if a new area of space opened that had such a risk, but the harm of applying it to existing space is too great.


Yeah, that would be cool. Some new space that's just a whole lot more betterer but carries the cost of being unstable.

Maybe instead of just the mobile clone array you have service contracts with the station owner to move your stuff if they need to leave. Everyone would have such a contract to start with and would have to chose not to. Perhaps being free until you log in the first time after the change...CCP managed to pull something like that off with the avatar changes and such.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-01-21 21:50:37 UTC
Ispai Ponue wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:
It's a fun concept. But this is still a game. RL happens, people have to go away for indeterminate amounts of time, with or without warning. Without an 'RL failsafe' of some sort, this idea can't be anything more than a cool concept.


Perhaps the addition then of a clone backup.

Maybe the idea of complete material destruction is enough and the clone idea is too much. I like the idea of having to completely reset if you screw up really bad, but yeah...needs something for the people that get hit by busses and can't log in for months. I think anything short of that though could be avoidable by just flipping to a mobile clone before you leave on vacation.



I have to disagree with you there. Eve has a significant portion of it's player base that is either active, inactive, or reserve military. If the world's **** hits the fan, and they get called overnight, they can't be penalized like this idea suggests. A far more likely scenario than being hit by a bus. There are so many reasons someone may have to step out of the game on very short notice. I think if you tuned the idea back a bit to parts of solar systems being obliterated by solar flares or something, that would be a better balance. But putting in more 'NPC services' isn't what Eve is about, and we have to remember that though Eve is Real, I was there, etc, it's still a game.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2014-01-21 21:54:26 UTC
I'm one of those that would like destructible outposts, but only as the final part of taking sov. Station is "captured" capturing corp has a chance to scuttle the outpost, requires many freighters worth of special demo charges, requires extra time, so enemys can try to re-take the system and nullify the countdown.

I wrote a wall of text about it last year I think.

Removing an entire start system is, in comparison, ridiculous.

Players can make another outpost. I wrote that post so that all assets in a station would be blown away, and all the enemy/neutral clones as well: why harbour rats, skunks and badgers in your house if you can easily afford to knock it down and rebuild in no time?

A star blowing up? takes an entire system out of the game. With the exploding outpost idea, I was told it would wreak havoc with the server. Imagine what taking a system out would do. Whats more, considering Nullsec powers, and the whole idea of losing = didn't want that sov anyways, do you think any nullsec power would hesitate a SECOND to blow away various strategic star systems in a scorched earth war? You'd end up with disconnected island chains in null, and even more stagnation.

and for the record: Timothy Zahn sucks, and so do his ideas.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2014-01-21 21:56:35 UTC
Ispai Ponue wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why, if I let my sub lapse for a month or two, should I lose everything I own with no possibility of recovery?


Because you didn't put your clone in a safe place. You have opportunity to do so in order to avoid that destruction.

Could make it easier for the lazy by making all NPC clone facilities capable of moving your clone if needed.



I didn't say a thing about my clone. I lose those fairly frequently anyway.

I meant my assets. My ships, modules, blueprints, all of my stuff. Billions of ISK of stuff, that you want to take away from me with no way at all for me to save it.


Tell me this: What incentive is there for a player to return to the game if everything they owned before was just gone, with not even the slightest glimmer of possibility that it may be recovered?
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#14 - 2014-01-21 22:00:51 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:

Tell me this: What incentive is there for a player to return to the game if everything they owned before was just gone, with not even the slightest glimmer of possibility that it may be recovered?


Same one as always: you like the game. What I don't understand are people who want to play a game in which they can't lose.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#15 - 2014-01-21 22:08:29 UTC
Ispai Ponue wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:

Tell me this: What incentive is there for a player to return to the game if everything they owned before was just gone, with not even the slightest glimmer of possibility that it may be recovered?


Same one as always: you like the game. What I don't understand are people who want to play a game in which they can't lose.



But who likes the game enough to start again from scratch? I certainly wouldn't.



There's a difference between not being able to lose, and not having literally everything you've spent years working for taken away from you with absolutely no possibility whatsoever of preventing it.
Ispai Ponue
Chaos Delivery Systems
#16 - 2014-01-21 22:11:53 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:


But who likes the game enough to start again from scratch? I certainly wouldn't.


I've done it many times and yes, I enjoy it.
Dolorous Tremmens
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-01-21 22:16:13 UTC
Ispai Ponue wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:


But who likes the game enough to start again from scratch? I certainly wouldn't.


I've done it many times and yes, I enjoy it.



And some people pay to enjoy being demeaned and beaten, while others enjoy beestings or doing their taxes. Masochism isn't for everyone.

Get some Eve. Make it yours.

Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-01-21 22:45:26 UTC
Dolorous Tremmens wrote:
I'm one of those that would like destructible outposts, but only as the final part of taking sov. Station is "captured" capturing corp has a chance to scuttle the outpost, requires many freighters worth of special demo charges, requires extra time, so enemys can try to re-take the system and nullify the countdown.

I wrote a wall of text about it last year I think.

Removing an entire start system is, in comparison, ridiculous.

Players can make another outpost. I wrote that post so that all assets in a station would be blown away, and all the enemy/neutral clones as well: why harbour rats, skunks and badgers in your house if you can easily afford to knock it down and rebuild in no time?

A star blowing up? takes an entire system out of the game. With the exploding outpost idea, I was told it would wreak havoc with the server. Imagine what taking a system out would do. Whats more, considering Nullsec powers, and the whole idea of losing = didn't want that sov anyways, do you think any nullsec power would hesitate a SECOND to blow away various strategic star systems in a scorched earth war? You'd end up with disconnected island chains in null, and even more stagnation.

and for the record: Timothy Zahn sucks, and so do his ideas.


outposts should have offensive capabilities, like maybe sieged dread worth of DPS. these stations can either be compeltely destroyed, or require a long-lengthy capture cycle involving a covops frigate or titan something that the fleet must defend from defenders until the cycle is complete (lets say 3-4 hours).

this way, a station is multitudes harder to capture than destroy, but it saves you the trouble of having to completely rebuild a station.

also, defneders should eb able to self-destruct the station with a 100km AoE the size of 5 DD's and 15 minute countdown, unstoppable by the attacking force.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#19 - 2014-01-21 23:14:26 UTC
This is sorta what i had anticipated the Incursions to do. But as it stands, Incursions don't "do" anything....they "invade" a system, and sit safe and sound in their little sites. What kind of invasion doesn't actually invade. "Ok, we're here, we have "control" of the system, we're going to leave now." Yeah, that sounds legit.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2014-01-21 23:40:40 UTC
Ispai Ponue wrote:


On a somewhat rare occasion some sun could go nova. It would result in the complete destruction of the constellation.



I would limit that weapon to caps and supers and only allow it to fire once a day :D
12Next page