These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

While we are killing sacred cows, how about nerfing npcs?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2014-11-17 18:31:01 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m


Supported.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#22 - 2014-11-17 18:40:14 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m


And Jita and Perimeter would be lowsec in about a week. Along with all the stores of items, mods, and resources within it.

That'd be hilarious, I'm all for it.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Sgt Soulless
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2014-11-17 18:55:10 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m


And Jita and Perimeter would be lowsec in about a week. Along with all the stores of items, mods, and resources within it.

That'd be hilarious, I'm all for it.


More likely that the whole galaxy would be hi-sec in a month or two. PvE focused players out number PvP focused players pretty significantly.
Elfi Wolfe
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2014-11-17 18:55:39 UTC
Only thing I would ask to keep is that the official capitals of the the 4 empires, the 12 starting systems, the 12 career agents systems and routes between then can go no lower than .5 security.

Other than that it would be more interesting to check the route before heading out.

No idea if all empire space would end up as low sec or high sec. Or might it just stay high or low and just move up and down in their own security. Ie a over missioned systems goes to 1 sec and an empty systems drops to .5.

Even if a system does not lose high sec, mission runners would be moving arround to find new missions, miners would move to fond the right belts.

And if systems could change security would there be player ops to increase sec on shortcut systems or ops to force system to lowsec to break trade routes?

Never under estimate people desire to bend systems as far as they can.

"Please point to the place on the doll where the carebear touched you."
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2014-11-17 19:05:23 UTC
A changing map would mean paying attention to 'road conditions' for haulers.

It would mean that industry might have to move as the security of the area changed (this happens in cities IRL)

It would make Blue donuts obsolete.

But oh, so many questions would need answering. What would happen to a supercap that suddenly found itself in a hisec system as the ground changed beneath its feet? Would owned stations suddenly shift to npc as the sov shifted to Concord? What activities would make the sov change and could an organized group use that to play a terrain type of warfare where they altered the enemies security space.

What makes Null NULL aside from a label on a map? What makes Jita hisec? These are question worth asking, not how the rules are now but how the rules could be. But do not try to just cherrypick your 'changing sov' for activities you don't approve of or to make for easier targets.

If mutable sov is something you want represented to CCP then I am your huckleberry but understand I will take it all the way or not at all.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#26 - 2014-11-17 19:08:49 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
A changing map would mean paying attention to 'road conditions' for haulers.

It would mean that industry might have to move as the security of the area changed (this happens in cities IRL)

It would make Blue donuts obsolete.

But oh, so many questions would need answering. What would happen to a supercap that suddenly found itself in a hisec system as the ground changed beneath its feet? Would owned stations suddenly shift to npc as the sov shifted to Concord? What activities would make the sov change and could an organized group use that to play a terrain type of warfare where they altered the enemies security space.

What makes Null NULL aside from a label on a map? What makes Jita hisec? These are question worth asking, not how the rules are now but how the rules could be. But do not try to just cherrypick your 'changing sov' for activities you don't approve of or to make for easier targets.

If mutable sov is something you want represented to CCP then I am your huckleberry but understand I will take it all the way or not at all.

m


And of course, those questions are why such a concept is unfeasible from the outset. Capital ships alone makes the idea completely moot, nullsec would have to be able to only move to lowsec, no further. But then the problem comes from highsec(as usual, since it's the special snowflake of the sec status rules; the "inconsistency", as you might put it).

Because if a highsec area drops to lowsec, you put a capital in it, and then it becomes highsec again... ?

Yeah, that's just not workable.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#27 - 2014-11-17 19:17:52 UTC
I say no, the cap pilot are already complaining that now they have to play jumpplanner online, the rest of eve would have to be going to one of the other 3rd party sites and such. The htfu or gtfo mentality \ get alts noob has already ran a decline in population. Other than that this is just a nerd hugh sec thread so people are forced out of empire

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Freay Chrome
Perkone
Caldari State
#28 - 2014-11-17 19:29:14 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
A changing map would mean paying attention to 'road conditions' for haulers.

It would mean that industry might have to move as the security of the area changed (this happens in cities IRL)

It would make Blue donuts obsolete.

But oh, so many questions would need answering. What would happen to a supercap that suddenly found itself in a hisec system as the ground changed beneath its feet? Would owned stations suddenly shift to npc as the sov shifted to Concord? What activities would make the sov change and could an organized group use that to play a terrain type of warfare where they altered the enemies security space.

What makes Null NULL aside from a label on a map? What makes Jita hisec? These are question worth asking, not how the rules are now but how the rules could be. But do not try to just cherrypick your 'changing sov' for activities you don't approve of or to make for easier targets.

If mutable sov is something you want represented to CCP then I am your huckleberry but understand I will take it all the way or not at all.

m


CCP is already talking about allowing capital ships in hisec so what's the problem? Just tick the little box that says: XL weapons, fighters & fighter-bombers cannot be used in this system if sec-status >0.4

And you can always just take the gates and/or cyno out to a low/0.0.

CCPs big plan is also to make everything player-owned and controlled so an owned station would stay that way even if sec-status rises above 0.0

YES please make system sec-status depend on on-going activity in that system. Would make EvE far more interresting and fun
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#29 - 2014-11-17 19:38:24 UTC
CCP Leeloo wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m

OH GOD YES Big smile

This could be leveraged into some really interesting play dynamics.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#30 - 2014-11-17 19:43:07 UTC
Allow capitals in highsec and those problems go away.

Please be my huckleberry (whatever that means).

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#31 - 2014-11-17 19:45:44 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Allow capitals in highsec and those problems go away.

Please be my huckleberry (whatever that means).


"I'm your huckleberry" is most likely a reference to the movie Tombstone. It's said by Doc Holiday fairly frequently, when offering or accepting a gunfight.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#32 - 2014-11-17 19:51:53 UTC
Elfi Wolfe wrote:
Only thing I would ask to keep is that the official capitals of the the 4 empires, the 12 starting systems, the 12 career agents systems and routes between then can go no lower than .5 security.



I for one welcome our new Amarr overlords and Amarr Emperor Family Academy market hub.

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2014-11-17 20:00:04 UTC
Wouldn't this completely destroy mission running?

Low and null sec systems do not run missions (at least not often, a few run lvl 5's) The majority are run in high sec space. If this were to happen it would almost entirely remove missions from the game or at least those willing to run them. Given that a decent portion of the game is made up by those who solely run missions wouldn't that be a little too much?
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#34 - 2014-11-17 20:00:12 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Because if a highsec area drops to lowsec, you put a capital in it, and then it becomes highsec again... ?



IIRC CCP didn't completely rule out the possibility of allowing capital ships into Highsec after they enabled them to jump gates. In the long run that might very well be what we're going to see ... One simple rule to keep balance in check would be to disallow capitals from activating any offensive/logistic etc. modules whatsoever, else concord steps in and blows you sky high (god that would be hilarious).

I think movable sec status would fit well into all that "the empires are loosing their grip on power"-thingy that CCP has been advertising. Seeing as nullsec is going towards occupancy sov anyways ...
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#35 - 2014-11-17 20:06:28 UTC
capitals in high sec is bad idea mkay..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Bullet Therapist
FT Cold Corporation
#36 - 2014-11-17 20:11:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Bullet Therapist
CCP Leeloo wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m

OH GOD YES Big smile


Nooo! Think of the poor logistics nerds. The horror, the horror!
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#37 - 2014-11-17 20:19:51 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
A changing map would mean paying attention to 'road conditions' for haulers.

It would mean that industry might have to move as the security of the area changed (this happens in cities IRL)

It would make Blue donuts obsolete.

But oh, so many questions would need answering. What would happen to a supercap that suddenly found itself in a hisec system as the ground changed beneath its feet? Would owned stations suddenly shift to npc as the sov shifted to Concord? What activities would make the sov change and could an organized group use that to play a terrain type of warfare where they altered the enemies security space.

What makes Null NULL aside from a label on a map? What makes Jita hisec? These are question worth asking, not how the rules are now but how the rules could be. But do not try to just cherrypick your 'changing sov' for activities you don't approve of or to make for easier targets.

If mutable sov is something you want represented to CCP then I am your huckleberry but understand I will take it all the way or not at all.

m

Mike, although this idea appeals at many levels, especially where there is the opportunity to drop the hurt on (inserted hated playstyle or group here) there are a few issues that would need cleaning up first either way. You know what they are I believe if the minutes and hints dropped mean anything, but no one is unaware. That will enrage quite a few, loud, self entitled player communities quite enough. That will be a challange to deal with.
The process is already underway in some matters, and will no doubt continue. So more? Not sure it is a good idea right now.

Wormhole Space is giving opportunities, as will the new space, and null will arrive there too. Possibly when the time is right.

Whilst shaking things up will always appeal to people (until it happens then they hate it) do not let that sway you. Do what is right for EVE, at the time that is right for EVE and all else will drop in place.

But I've got to agree regardless, the sheer mayhem would be hilarious,
but my sensible side tells me that unfortunately the hangover would be somewhat unpleasant.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#38 - 2014-11-17 20:39:30 UTC
While we're hi-jacking the thread to be about variable sec status I'd like to propose the following basic mechanics

1: Have a "native" sec status that the systems gravitate towards, which is similar to the current security of the space

2:Sec status only updates at DT, and pilots get a notification if the sec status of the space they are in changes during DT.

3: Mineral richness is now modified by sec status but not entirely determined by this, but uses a formula for units of a given ore in a belt along the lines of (((Richness * Current sec) / belts) * random mod) with a richness modifier that is independent for each mineral, and the random mod averaging out to ~1.0.

4: The NPE systems and all systems currently receiving newbie protection are locked as highsec, but may be pushed as low as .5.

5: Structures which require sov and end up pushed into HS are still owned by the corporation or alliance, and their standings apply to tax and refining, but no new jobs requiring sov may be started. Any service fees (less a cut of 10%ish to Concord) are paid to them, and stations are freeported. Gate guns do not aggress -10 players, but standard station guns do.

6: FW space becomes HS of the controlling faction if it becomes HS, even if it would otherwise be discontiguous.

7: Sov structures in highsec are valid targets under wardec, and may still only be anchored in null

8: All NPC null gets sov structures with sufficient NPC presence to require a medium large fleet with no bounty.

9: Players may launch sov structures for NPC factions during the cool-down timer on the respective faction's epic arc. If more than one epic arc is currently on cool down, this option launches it for the most recently completed faction.

10: Sec status is both positively and negatively affected by player actions.

Examples of positive sec status change:
Pirate faction rats destroyed
Large market volume
Extremely high jump count
Volume mined

Examples of negative sec status change:
Non-Wardec PvP
Empire faction rats destroyed
Value of ships destroyed

11: The boundaries between types of space are much harder to move the sec status through.

12: Capital modules used in highsec result in a concordoken regardless of other crimewatch elements, but activate properly. Green/yellow safety disables these modules for your convenience.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#39 - 2014-11-17 20:46:05 UTC
I believe this can be made to work, although for proper rollout to not be flooded with negative assumptions, certain ground rules will need to be made clear.

The space would remain stable, so long as it was maintained as such.
For empire systems, what we call high sec, the majority are being maintained as a static safe zone.
I would point out that this needs to be stressed as safe, to stop fear mongering on the topic.
(Yes, we would all get a good laugh if Jita lost Concord, but it would be too negative for the playerbase.)
Basically, anything considered high sec at this time should always remain as such.
I think newer systems can be discovered within the boundaries of traditional empire space, which can be modified, if this feels needed.

This would need to affect systems which were exclusively outside of current NPC empire influence.
That means null sec, as well as possibly some areas of low sec.

If players worked WITH empires / NPC controls in low, then systems could raise or lower status accordingly.
(Within a limited range)
This could add whole new significance to Faction Warfare, I believe.

For null, I feel stability over long term would naturally erode the presence of NPC pirates, down to levels normally associated with high sec.
I believe the same would apply to mineral content.
I think that an area should become worn down by farming NPCs or asteroids, to the point where it becomes quite comparable to high sec space.

By the same logic, (in my opinion), an area allowed to go wild, and not have domesticating influences like regular player harvests, should see the return of the more powerful NPC pirates normally associated with null, as well as seeing the mineral values of the asteroids recover in quality over time.

I think there is a way to make this work, we simply need to define the variables in order to limit them in the interests of good play.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
DaeHan Minhyok
Logical Outcomes
#40 - 2014-11-17 20:50:09 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Be careful what you ask for.

If you want dynamic security space, fine. Then where lots of pirates or anomolies are run the sec would climb as law asserted itself. Null constellations could (with effort) slowly become hisec. Nullbears would become nomadic as the fields they tilled slowly became barren as the pirates moved on and Concord moved in.

m

As long as the ibcome scales, so the more u make the less you'll make in the future as your sec goes higher.