EVE General Discussion

i don't see the downside about letting people pimp their raven all day long while we use their sub money to make the rest of eve better.

The downside is a bunch of people (more than we already have) complaining about those pimped ravens getting blown up because EVE has no safe zones like other games for people to just grind for gear. CCP is a business and would almost have no choice but to respond by making the game easier for those types , starting the slippery slope to EVE becoming just another hand holding MMO.

No thanks.

And you have no way of knowing (or controlling) what CCP would do with their sub money. For the past 8 years a lot of our sub money went towards things like DUST, Incarna and WoD.......

no they don't.

look what happened after one of the first corp thefts? people said "ccp fix it or we'll quit". ccp let them walk, they subsequently gained more subs than the lost from the resulting fallout.

making missions suck less, isn't "catering to themeparkers" it's making missions suck less. isk has to come from somewhere, missions are one of those places, there's no need for them to be intentionally abhorrent.

I'm sure they could change that, but I doubt it would be that simple to do without ensuring that bots and multiboxers would nuke he economy into the ground within a few weeks.

No, I use the term sandbox to mean "not constrained by mountains of mechanical restrictions". People shouldn't be forced into playing as a group to reap the best rewards. I don't disagree that there's changes that need to be made to encourage more social interaction, but it certainly shouldn't mean that development focus should shift to working on PVE mechanics, since they are by their nature only semi-social. One side will always be AI. So if anything, focus should be shifted to generating more income through meaningful PvP, so those little red crosses you shoot have a player shooting back.

But the real problem isn't the PVE content, it's risk aversion from players who only want to gain isk. No matter how much you change the content, without taking away the risk of being screwed over by someone else, people will continue to solo grind, like they do in nearly every MMO. Unless the social content allows them to be completely safe while grinding all day long, they will continue to play as they do.

Ex Wow players do nothing but gripe about how their game has been dumbed down then have the cheek to try to do the same here. To reap these so-called benefits Wowifcation brings.

Gevlon makes some points in a mangled incoherent sort of way, but the problem itself is exaggerated, and it's just the latest in a series of people using player retention stats to try to justify some campaign or other. He's quite explicitly asking for a combat immunity bubble for farmers who want their interractions to only involve grinding ISK with like minded zombies. So we can be overrun by themepark players who will destroy the economy. Get out. And highsec supercaps to 'peacock around' in LMFAO.

The last two PVE content additions (WHs and Incursions) are geared towards group play. To a degree they were hybrid PVE-PVP additions given Whs have to be protected/claimed and Incursions spawn outside of highsec, which is how content should be added. If he wants group play for the zombie farmers running level 4s, remove them from highsec. Then we'll see if people will group up to run them or just flounce about bawwing.

yep, meaningful pvp that nobody experiences because one of their primary ways of funding their pvp experience is completely abhorrent.

"that was a great roam guys, now i'm not going to do anything with you for a week while i grind more isk so i can lose more spaceships". it's simply counter productive to punish people for working together [anywhere, not just in missions] instead of encouraging them to group up and do ~stuff~.

Actually there is. The more 'fun' missions are the more those people would do nothing but.

Look at the present. There are people who have done NOTHING in EVE but Save Damsels and Stop Thieves lol. That's fine, but in a game about people, you don't really want to encourage that. You want them to hunger for better PVE. Better PVE already exists.

Better PVE is found in incursions in high sec, or lvl 5 missions/FW missions/Belt npc hunting in low sec or anomalies and complexes in null or Sleeper sites in Wormholes. Stuff that has risk and that encourage competition and sometimes cooperation.

Missions are to bottom basement "if you have no other way, here is some content you can use to build yourself back up after you go totally bust" things a game like EVE needs. But no, they don't need to be 'better' than they are now. They are a means to an end, not an end in and of themselves.

but we're not making the pve "better" we're just removing a 'punishment' for people interacting (you know, that thing that creates content).
i can understand why 50% of new players quit, if the tutorials kinda lead you to do mission after mission and then say "here's a multiplayer game where everything we've shown you so far is best done by ignoring every other player in the game".

CCP are on a NPE trip at the moment. honestly the fact that npc corps, mission running, and mining all promote some kind of "play eve like a single player game" mentality really isn't a good part of the NPE.

but incursions are a limited resource, the player base already kinda has issues supporting the current amount of people running incursions.

also you can't just log in and "run an incursion or two" like you can with missions, while your dinner is in the oven etc. sure incursions are a better form of pve and i do like them... however, they've got their own set of issues especially when it comes to accessibility.

also consider the possibility; if it wasn't detrimental to do missions as a group, would it be possible that people would form groups, and then go and run level 5s together in more 'dangerous' areas of space (earn isk while you wait for some one to take your bait!)