These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ship skin and clothing enhancements to benefit pilots

Author
Bethany Mishi
United Alpha Pilots
#1 - 2016-01-16 12:31:08 UTC
the ships skins are super nice and character clothing enhancement has been around for several years. both of these items bring a lot to the game. Here's an idea: try adding ship or skill enhancements to these items. E.G. Goggles or Glasses worn on the character that enhance weapon accuracy or damage or a ship skin that enhances armor resists or hitpoints. Small bonuses to give pilots an edge in pvp combat and even miners increased yield or ore hold space.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#2 - 2016-01-16 12:51:28 UTC
No, they cease to be vanity items at that point and become mandatory to be competitive.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Bethany Mishi
United Alpha Pilots
#3 - 2016-01-16 13:02:10 UTC
Untrue. There are a variety of skills in the game that can be enchanced meaning a continued variety of items to be worn and skins to be applied to ships. Skill or ship attribute bonuses just simply need to be kept small on the items. 1 percent increase to weapon damage or tracking speed for Goggles or Glasses. Small 2 or 3 percent bonuses for armor hitpoints or shield regen. Providing only small bonuses give players only a small edge compared to other players without them.
Iain Cariaba
#4 - 2016-01-16 13:46:41 UTC
Bethany Mishi wrote:
Providing only small bonuses give players only a small edge compared to other players without them.

That they provide bonuses at all would make some people imagine they're mandatory. Some people think +5 learning implants are mandatory, and quite often come onto forums whinjng about how they need to be cheaper/removable because they can't/won't PvP with them.

Additionally, ship skins and clothing do not go away when you lose the ship/get podded, and permanent bonuses are bad.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#5 - 2016-01-16 14:51:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Bethany Mishi wrote:
Untrue. There are a variety of skills in the game that can be enchanced meaning a continued variety of items to be worn and skins to be applied to ships. Skill or ship attribute bonuses just simply need to be kept small on the items. 1 percent increase to weapon damage or tracking speed for Goggles or Glasses. Small 2 or 3 percent bonuses for armor hitpoints or shield regen. Providing only small bonuses give players only a small edge compared to other players without them.

1% is huge in EVE. That is the difference between 1300 DPS and 1200 DPS, between 0.5 tracking and 0.7 tracking, between 100,000 EHP and 95,000 EHP. Your idea is flawed and dangerous to the game beyond imagination. Get lost with your P2W entitlement.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#6 - 2016-01-16 17:39:49 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Bethany Mishi wrote:
Untrue. There are a variety of skills in the game that can be enchanced meaning a continued variety of items to be worn and skins to be applied to ships. Skill or ship attribute bonuses just simply need to be kept small on the items. 1 percent increase to weapon damage or tracking speed for Goggles or Glasses. Small 2 or 3 percent bonuses for armor hitpoints or shield regen. Providing only small bonuses give players only a small edge compared to other players without them.

1% is huge in EVE. That is the difference between 1300 DPS and 1200 DPS, between 0.5 tracking and 0.7 tracking, between 100,000 EHP and 95,000 EHP. Your idea is flawed and dangerous to the game beyond imagination. Get lost with your P2W entitlement.

Check your math Rivr. Your numbers are are 5 to 10% differences, not 1%. P

Even still. No, I would not want this for the two reasons already stated:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
That they provide bonuses at all would make some people imagine they're mandatory. Some people think +5 learning implants are mandatory, and quite often come onto forums whinjng about how they need to be cheaper/removable because they can't/won't PvP with them.

Iain Cariaba wrote:
ship skins and clothing do not go away when you lose the ship/get podded, and permanent bonuses are bad.

With the last one; yes, skills are also permanent. But they take time to train, there is an opportunity cost in training certain skills over others (see: if I train X skill now then I will not be able to train Y skill, but both are useful), and they are not interchangeable based on the meta or whims of the person training them (see: if you train to kite but the meta changes to brawling, you can't simply swap your skills over to the new thing).

Clothing and accessories that grant bonuses are both permanent and interchangeable with no penalties for their use. They would be like implant hardwirings but without the cost and tedium of replacing them if you get podded.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#7 - 2016-01-16 19:14:57 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Bethany Mishi wrote:
Untrue. There are a variety of skills in the game that can be enchanced meaning a continued variety of items to be worn and skins to be applied to ships. Skill or ship attribute bonuses just simply need to be kept small on the items. 1 percent increase to weapon damage or tracking speed for Goggles or Glasses. Small 2 or 3 percent bonuses for armor hitpoints or shield regen. Providing only small bonuses give players only a small edge compared to other players without them.

1% is huge in EVE. That is the difference between 1300 DPS and 1200 DPS, between 0.5 tracking and 0.7 tracking, between 100,000 EHP and 95,000 EHP. Your idea is flawed and dangerous to the game beyond imagination. Get lost with your P2W entitlement.

Check your math Rivr. Your numbers are are 5 to 10% differences, not 1%. P

I am aware of that. ^^ But she did not stop at 1%, she also mentioned 2, 3% and why stop there if you can buy chance increase to your victory with money anyways? Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Akrasjel Lanate
Lanate Industries
#8 - 2016-01-17 08:20:23 UTC
No

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Nyalnara
Dark Evil Undead Ponies Productions
#9 - 2016-01-17 09:29:56 UTC
I'm okay with that kind of thing (non-destructible bonuses not dependent on skills), with the following conditions:
  • Must not be available in NEX store: no pay to win.
  • Must not be transferable once owned: no power-leveling an alt/friend/newbie.
  • Must be non-stackable, just like implants. Limited number of slots, limited effects through possible combinations.
  • Must be kept as low-bonuses, as it will stack with skills, implants, and drugs. 1>5%.
  • Must be hard to obtain. By hard, i mean in the style of "crying blood for 5 years, farming all corporation standings from a faction to +10". You want that bonus, you better go earn it. Can be scaled to access the higher bonus items: 20% of +10 corps for the 1% thingie, 100% at +10 for the 5% bonus.
  • Should be obtainable, if possible, through methods related to bonus: exploration bonuses through exploration completion, racial weaponry through racial standings, etc...


(Last 2 points may be especially interesting to consider as it would also extend the retention of WoW-like players, as they just want to grind a game to get higher rewards...)

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#10 - 2016-01-17 15:04:10 UTC
This one represents one of the great quandaries of EvE.

On the one hand you have the no pay to win aspect, and yet with plex sold for ISK there is in reality a huge pay to win mechanic already in the game so why why not allow this one?

On the other hand there is the where does it stop mentality. Those players usually acknowledge the pay to win aspects plex and then seek to justify keeping it as the only one because it has always been that way.

Personally as long as the bonuses are small, in the 1% or so range and they are affected by stacking penalties I say why not. surely it will not be game breaker and pilot skill can usually overcome that small of a statistical advantage anyway.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#11 - 2016-01-17 16:18:44 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

On the one hand you have the no pay to win aspect, and yet with plex sold for ISK there is in reality a huge pay to win mechanic already in the game so why why not allow this one?

Except its not, you are trading goods, one persons time for another persons money. And the entire concept that ISK = winning is just flawed.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Max Deveron
Deveron Shipyards and Technology
#12 - 2016-01-17 22:02:04 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
This one represents one of the great quandaries of EvE.

On the one hand you have the no pay to win aspect, and yet with plex sold for ISK there is in reality a huge pay to win mechanic already in the game so why why not allow this one?

On the other hand there is the where does it stop mentality. Those players usually acknowledge the pay to win aspects plex and then seek to justify keeping it as the only one because it has always been that way.

Personally as long as the bonuses are small, in the 1% or so range and they are affected by stacking penalties I say why not. surely it will not be game breaker and pilot skill can usually overcome that small of a statistical advantage anyway.


Plex is not P2W....so what if you bought plex and then sold it for ISK, you **** can still be destroyed wihtout any real advantages...ask all the ones who thought purps and +5's in their first month gave them uber superpowers.

But now the idea of permanent bonus that can not be destroyed? NO, Hell no it cant be allowed. That is a Golden Ammo concept and it should be shot down immediately.

The only solution for these items would be to make all Skins non-permanent, and if your wearing clothers when podded....well then you lose them as well. that is the only way it could work by making them destructible....but then maybe sales will fall and dwindle into nothing because no one wants to lose their cool clothes, and there will be no point skinning a ship that can be lost in mere seconds.

-1

CCP we really need a button for the forums that is opposite of LIKE
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#13 - 2016-01-17 22:33:45 UTC
There are plenty of bad ideas in F&I. Far fewer make me want to reach through my screen and slap whoever posted it. This one gets that honor.

Plex is not pay to win. Plex is pay to play. This, however, is pay to win and as such a horrible, horrible idea that undermines the best things in the game. Hell no.
Alena McJenkins
McJenkins' Saucy Shipwreckers LLC
#14 - 2016-01-20 06:35:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Alena McJenkins
A visual overlay of some kind would be kinda cool, but adding bonuses based on SKINs and clothing is just silly.


Also to note,
Max Deveron wrote:
Golden Ammo

could work as a hydrid shell. Make it similar to lead charges, but more expensive.

Sauce.

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#15 - 2016-01-20 07:03:52 UTC
See, this...

...this is why we really need a DISLIKE button.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Shelick
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2016-01-20 11:57:41 UTC
No.

pls unsub
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#17 - 2016-01-20 12:15:27 UTC
No.

Biomass.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#18 - 2016-01-20 12:33:45 UTC
And what about an ocd thing like putting a true sansha heat sink instead of a tech 2 or imperial navy one on a true sansha ship that gives you an extra 0.1?

Like a true sansha heat sink on a Phantasm that gives you a 1.3 damage multiplier instead of the 1.2 it usually gives?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

JonnyPew
Doomheim
#19 - 2016-01-20 14:24:59 UTC
Nope. Not gonna happen.

EVE Online video content creator

http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#20 - 2016-01-20 14:32:55 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Except its not, you are trading goods, one persons time for another persons money. And the entire concept that ISK = winning is just flawed.

Max Deveron wrote:
[Plex is not P2W....so what if you bought plex and then sold it for ISK, you **** can still be destroyed wihtout any real advantages...ask all the ones who thought purps and +5's in their first month gave them uber superpowers.

Zhilia Mann wrote:
Plex is not pay to win. Plex is pay to play. This, however, is pay to win and as such a horrible, horrible idea that undermines the best things in the game. Hell no.

And there we have it perfect examples of those who defend a P2W system simply because it has always been, just as I predicted.

Omnathious Deninard while plex can and often is used as a way of playing without having to pay cash money it can and is used to allow player that have limited gaming time to buy modules that give them an advantage. If you are flying a T1 frigate fit with the usual array of T1 and T2 modules and come up against a T1 frigate that is fit with all Officer or Deadspace modules you are at a distinct disadvantage. If the ISK needed for those modules was gained by buying a plex for cash and selling it then the situation fits the classic definition of P2W.

Max Deveron That plex can be sold for ISK and that ISK used to fit a ship in a manor that has superior performance is the very definition of P2W, the fact that that ship could be destroyed does not change that.

Zhilia Mann see the responses above.

Do I think that CCP should remove the plex system? No it serves the game and it's players, but that does not mean that it is not and can not be used as a P2W option for those with the real life cash and willingness to use it that way.
12Next page