These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A thought on Improving the PVP experience in EVE

Author
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#21 - 2014-06-26 22:50:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Just because im telling u that ur idea is bad doesnt mean i need to come up with one of my own. Im saying the current system is better than what ur suggesting.

Quote:
Last year at this time it was common to see over 50,000 players logged in at peak times, now I barely see 20,000.


what makes u think this has anything to do with null sec?
theres something like 8 times as many players in high sec as there is null sec.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#22 - 2014-06-26 22:56:38 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
Whatever, I was hoping to have an intelligent discussion on possible improvements for this game, but I guess I've come to the wrong place.

As I said several times already, you don't like my idea, fine, lets come up with an idea that WILL work.

This is the Features & Ideas forums, not general discussion. trolling here is far more pathetic than posting bad ideas.

The current system is not working, my idea may be bad, but I have yet to read anything better, and I have been playing for 6 years.



And here people have been giving you proper responses as to why your suggestion is bad, but you keep on dissing them and insisting that your idea is the best and is the only good one, instead of suggesting alternatives yourselves, thus resulting in people that continue to attempt to sway your thoughts and so on it continues in a vicious cycle.
Point of the matter is, your idea sucks, deal with it. But don't get mad at others when they point out that it's bad, after all, this is the Features and Ideas forum, where ideas get shot down on a daily basis.

That said, I will admit that I do not have an idea for sov mechanics, and nor do I care much. Like one of the other posters said, it's best left to the professionals who actually get paid for it since it's their job.

(Oh, and a sidenote, having played the game for 6 years doesn't mean you're automatically an expert on game mechanics. I've met 6 month old players who had a better understanding of the game than 10-year vets)
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#23 - 2014-06-26 23:22:15 UTC
So what if we forget about gate restrictions, but do something with cyno's on a smaller scale. Say if to much mass cyno's into a system within a given amount of time, say 5 minutes, the system will destabilize, and no cyno's can be lit for 30-60 minutes.

What I am trying to get at here, is some sort of mechanic to break up the blobs.

PVPers have been complaining about blob warfare for as long as I have been playing, yet it only seems to get worse. No matter how much we complain about bad mechanics, it is those same mechanics we continue to rely on to win battles. There has to be a way to stop this cycle, to revitalize PVP, and bring a new era to Null sec.

Thecoming indy changes are nice, but null sec dwellers are not indy players, they are primarily PVPers. many have indy alts, but dedicated indy players will never be more than renters there.

Players play PVP games, to PVP, not spend hours roaming for a few very one sided fights, or to spend hours in fleet getting yelled at by an over zealous FC. For the small gang PVP to really be what everybody seems to want it to be, we first need to breath new life into null sec. There are far to many system simply held as buffer, with near zero activity, aside from the occasional moon mining tower.

I know it seems like I pick on GSF a lot, but mostly i do not hate them, they are just the biggest threat, or the iconic bad guy, however you want to look at it.they are the best example we have to work with. this is as much if not more a compliment to GSF as anything. Everyone knows who they are, and they are the dominant force in null sec since TEST fell, some would say, since long before that.

Well any ways, for an example; GOONSWARM currently has over 11,000 members, and holds over 230 systems. How many of those do they actually use? I took a trip through their space with COVOPS. once you get through the pipe past their borders, it is empty space, I saw the occasional ratter, that panicked as soon as I entered local, but for the most part, almost every system I passed through was empty. What a waste. I mean, I get why they hold all that space, and it is the current bad mechanics that make it necessary. but it is still a huge waste. Null sec, just feels dead, aside from the few systems the big alliances actually use, and a few small pockets fought over by smaller groups. 80% of null sec is empty dead space.

A major change to null sec mechanics is needed. the changes made a few years ago to SOV mechanics are for the most part, all good changes. but how do we eliminate the need for power block alliances to hold such huge amounts of space, if not eliminate the need for those power blocks in the first place.

This is a forum for ideas, CCP has nothing, or they would have fixed it by now. So enough trolling, lets come up with an idea that will actually work.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#24 - 2014-06-26 23:37:17 UTC
- Get rid of the blue donut
- make insurance cover one boat at 100% not 0.5 boat at the cost of a smaller one
- - you still need to pay the insurance ontop of the boat, so the insurance cost + plus fit is what you loose but you can reship quicker
- disband the blue donut and start from scratch
- encourage small gang and solo pvp and reward it with the alliance tournament (check Smile)
- you want war and stuff destroyed, encourage it
- crash the market and put the devine limits back in place
- not everything that currently is in the players hands should be (you know what)

EVE is a better game than ever before now

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#25 - 2014-06-26 23:55:31 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
So what if we forget about gate restrictions, but do something with cyno's on a smaller scale. Say if to much mass cyno's into a system within a given amount of time, say 5 minutes, the system will destabilize, and no cyno's can be lit for 30-60 minutes.




Then whoever gets the first cyno lit gets an untouchable ball of supers for an hour.

How about this:

Buff nullsec income, across the board. Not moon mining though, anoms and plexes. At the same time, bring in a way for this income to be taxed at the aliance level, not just the corp one.

If you look at the map, http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.png you'll see three of the four biggest colour blobs are rental alliances. If the rental income could be replaced by an internal source, like making nullsec ratting income actually higher than highsec incursion/mission income (BRING BACK BLASTER RATTING), then perhaps these enormous rental slums could be freed up?

Trashing the need for rental fields like we have now would be a better way to start breaking up the powerblocs than mechanics that automatically hand the victory to the side that gets on grid first at least, though I freely admit that this is not a well thought out idea.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#26 - 2014-06-27 00:04:55 UTC
u could make supers easier to kill but easier to build?
nerf bridge range?
replace local with another, not so flawless, intel tool?
reduce sov block timers?

= Make null space harder to keep. Especially if u dnt use it and/or arent near it.?
= Ur space is smaller?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#27 - 2014-06-27 00:48:08 UTC
nice to see some ideas

I like it.

I do agree for the most part, EVE as far as the game code, playability, etc. goes, is in a better place then it has ever been. yet we have an average numbers of players logged in of only half what it was this time last year.

I am sure a lot of things will be fixed when the supers get there balance pass, but that could be another year.

Wormhole space is in very good shape, lots of small gang fights, lots of PVP, very little drama. I know there is much more to this then just the lack of local. what I keep coming back to is the limited fleet size. In a wormhole, you only get so much mass, then you have to roll the hole hoping to hit the same system again, to get more ships in. this has prevented blobbing in wormholes. that is where my original idea came from. But as many pointed out, mass limits in null sec will likely cause more problems then it would solve.

As far as the blue donut goes, I think everyone agrees, but before anything can be done about it, we need to determine the key mechanics, that created the blue donut to begin with. Why do players who seek PVP, prevent the very PVP they want by making all there neighbors friendly or blue?

Why do null sec PVPers surround themselves with so much blue space? there are obvious reasons, buffer against invasion fleets, they can not make one jump from your border to your home system. It is also easier to defend high value moons if they are in space you control. but to leave these mechanics in place, null sec needs to be much bigger. or jump range needs to be much smaller, or perhaps a combination.

What if the distance between constellations was increased, The distance between regions increased even more, and jump range was slightly nerfed. 10 lightyears jump range, would cover far less systems, making the required buffer much smaller in terms of numbers of systems. the basic map would be the same, constellations would stay easily accessible, but moving between constellations, or across regional boarders would be much more difficult. range of jump gates would be much greater keeping subcap travel about the same, but no more capitals crossing entire regions in two jumps.

Supers are the end game, they are meant to be game changers, but they where never meant to be used in super cap blobs. It is easy to say just nerf them, but I do not believe that is the answer. even the original Titan which was way more powerful then we have now, was not over powered, not at first, not until fleets of them started to show up at single battles. now you can see 200 supers show up for a single battle. that is the problem, not the ships themselves, but what to do a What is the answer. nerf them to the point nobody will want to use them, possibly, if you don't mind losing a large portion of the veteran players that spent years training into a titan. What would be fair to both sides? if we could find that answer, we would have a solution CCP would likely work with.

Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#28 - 2014-06-27 00:54:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Bugsy VanHalen
Daichi Yamato wrote:

= Make null space harder to keep. Especially if u dnt use it and/or arent near it.?
= Ur space is smaller?


I like this idea. What if sov degraded over time i know it does, but I mean completely, right down to it being lost. What if you had to maintain at least 1 index above 1 to keep sov, or the TCU would implode.

Currently if a system is left idle the index's gradually degrade back to 1, what if they did not stop there. What if they degraded down to zero, which caused a count down on the TCU. If the index was not brought back up by the time the timer runs out, the TCU explodes, and SOV is lost in that system. This would actually force an alliance to have at least some activity, even just a few members, in every system they hold. Would that be enough to discourage groups from holding more space then they need?
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#29 - 2014-06-27 01:06:34 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
So what if we forget about gate restrictions, but do something with cyno's on a smaller scale. Say if to much mass cyno's into a system within a given amount of time, say 5 minutes, the system will destabilize, and no cyno's can be lit for 30-60 minutes.




Then whoever gets the first cyno lit gets an untouchable ball of supers for an hour.

How about this:

Buff nullsec income, across the board. Not moon mining though, anoms and plexes. At the same time, bring in a way for this income to be taxed at the aliance level, not just the corp one.

If you look at the map, http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.png you'll see three of the four biggest colour blobs are rental alliances. If the rental income could be replaced by an internal source, like making nullsec ratting income actually higher than highsec incursion/mission income (BRING BACK BLASTER RATTING), then perhaps these enormous rental slums could be freed up?

Trashing the need for rental fields like we have now would be a better way to start breaking up the powerblocs than mechanics that automatically hand the victory to the side that gets on grid first at least, though I freely admit that this is not a well thought out idea.

Good idea,
One of the biggest issues with power blocks giving up large amounts of space is income, most alliances currently, dispite current changes, get a lot of there income from moons. Those moons are spread over large area's, and need to be defended.

Mechanics to feed alliance coffers from the bottom up I agree are needed, and are a major problem.

Corps can already tax ratting income, but where is the alliances piece of the pie? There should be an alliance tax, that taxes a percentage of all isk going into the wallets of its member corps.

Your corp gets 10% of your rating income, the alliance gets 10% of that, basically 1% of your ratting income. But not just ratting income, much industrial activity, at least at POSes, requires use of a corp wallet division, this should allow those activities to be taxed as well. If industrial activity within an alliance generated passive income for that alliance, that might encourage them to tolerate more industrial minded characters in their ranks.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#30 - 2014-06-27 02:10:32 UTC
As a PvP focused solo player style, that mostly flies in WH and null sec I would welcome the removal of the ISK drain when podded.
I could instead spend the money on small implants and get a small edge, rigth now Icant afford implants at all...

So +1 for removing the upgrading clone cost, but I would move this cost to clone switching.


For the blob warfare, I do not believe putting limits to fleet size would work

My suggestions are

1/ to apply the module design rules to all aspect of fleet fighting except for DPS projection.

So in the same way that having a fourth module of a specific type is really useless, having more than 3 players doing a specific effect in a fleet would simply be as worthless. This would apply to remote repair, tackling, e-war, etc... and force large fleet to coordinate their action at the squad level, making blob handling more difficult

2/ to multiply the number of grids for engagements during a system battle.

Have capitals weaponry not able to target anything on grid, and only able to apply damage outside of their grid. The only limit I could see is a limit of capitals per grid, may be have a maximum number of capitals per grid, so as to force grid multiplication for large capital fleets, but with any numbers of sub capitals allowed on each grid so that the subcaps can fight to protect/destroy the capitals....

This would force the powerful blobs to break out their capitals fleet in different points of a system to target a station/POS/structure, or even other capitals.. Two enemy capitals on the same grid could not target each others... and capitals would rely on subcaps for their targeting.

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project

Previous page12