These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Would having a PvP arena help remove stuff from the game?

Author
Luc Chastot
#1 - 2017-06-14 22:58:36 UTC
So, if CCP designed a PvP arena to encourage players to blow things up ala Alliance Tournament, do you think it would help ships and modules from the game? I know RvB exists and dueling is an in-game mechanic, but I'm wondering if we had a more permanent arena/tournament would help with this much needed goal. It could even be an ISK sink with betting and entry fees, and CONCORD battleships that blow the wrecks up because **** loot.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#2 - 2017-06-14 23:12:09 UTC
No it would not, in fact it would most likely have the opposite effect of what you are thinking.

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

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2017-06-14 23:52:08 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
So, if CCP designed a PvP arena to encourage players to blow things up ala Alliance Tournament, do you think it would help ships and modules from the game? I know RvB exists and dueling is an in-game mechanic, but I'm wondering if we had a more permanent arena/tournament would help with this much needed goal. It could even be an ISK sink with betting and entry fees, and CONCORD battleships that blow the wrecks up because **** loot.


Why blow up loot? It is not an ISK source and, in general, adds to the in-game economy.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#4 - 2017-06-15 00:00:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
I heard CCP did design a PvP arena. It's called EVE. Or if you get fussy maybe it's called Null. See how much use it gets currently.

Also betting will never ever be supported in EVE, because of legal reasons.
mkint
#5 - 2017-06-15 04:45:13 UTC
Arena, no. Better hooks, yes. There are nearly limitless opportunities for PVP in EVE, and arenas are basically everywhere. Formalizing one would not have an effect on uptake. If people aren't dueling in enough numbers to matter, what makes you think an arena would be any different. FW comes to mind as something that's very nearly already what you're asking for, and while it could use some updates to have more things to do, it mostly just needs to be far more accessible.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#6 - 2017-06-15 10:02:20 UTC
Every game that has added an arena has seen the PvP outside of it vanish.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2017-06-15 14:30:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Every game that has added an arena has seen the PvP outside of it vanish.


There area reasons for that. At the press of a button, arena will usually give you a fight as opposed to roaming looking for it. You also very rarely get blueballed because both side agreed to enter the arena and there is a more or less sure chance that the fight you will get won't be a complete curb-stomp.

For all the unwanted rules it usually add on PvP, arena usually mean you no longer have to look around for a long time to get a fight. It's really different from EVE.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#8 - 2017-06-15 15:00:41 UTC
I support PVP arenas, under the following conditions:


1) In order to get to said arena, you must travel into lowsec to visit a Concord titan. There will be no stations, citadels, PVE opportunities, or POSes within 6 jumps.
2) The Concord titan will bridge you into an isolated pocket with another group of similar size (you will not get to decide if you want to take the fight, as soon as you bridge you're committed)
3) Neither group can leave until one group has been podded (anyone who logs off is now prevented from ever getting bridged home, and can self destruct when they're ready to leave or spend the rest of their lives alone in empty space)
4) Anti-griefing mechanics to prevent one group from just running away for 3 hours to destroy the other group's enjoyment of the match



As others have mentioned the advantages of this:
1) People looking for real fights find real fights. No blueballing required.
2) People looking to gank ratters can still go gank ratters
3) People looking to camp gates can still camp gates
4) FW is still a thing, and anyone looking to gank FW plex runners can still gank FW plex runners


Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP. Go take some real fights against PVP ships. The only people who have any credit to make such a claim are the ones that do FW for the sake of the PVP, in which case there will still be plex runners for you to fight and kill (as isk remains a necessity for pvp).

Anyone complaining that it ruins their ability to dunk PVP roams with blobs, well, go take a real fight that you might actually lose and stop being risk-averse.

Anyone complaining that it reduces risk for ratters is free to go roaming through null sov looking for ratters, to put the fear of loss back in their hearts.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#9 - 2017-06-15 16:18:28 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:



Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP.


No I went though a game adding an area, it killed all the PvP outside of it.
Lothros Andastar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2017-06-15 16:31:32 UTC
It already exists, it's called undocking.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2017-06-15 16:32:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Old Pervert wrote:



Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP.


No I went though a game adding an area, it killed all the PvP outside of it.


The PvP happening because of the "strategy/politic game" in EVE would still happen but people doing PvP for the sake of it would go to arenas because there would be content there instead of looking for someone across the EVE universe who want to engage you.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#12 - 2017-06-15 16:39:10 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Old Pervert wrote:



Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP.


No I went though a game adding an area, it killed all the PvP outside of it.


Okay, you say that, but you fail to offer any justification or supposition as to how it would happen. "A game" is not Eve, which very likely means any links drawn between the two are very shallow at best.

What kind of PVP would you no longer see? Go ahead and pick one, we'll debate that in detail. Don't say "PVP", pick a specific type of engagement, any one you want.

At the end of the day, the moment ratters become too ripe, people will choose to roam them for the killmails, the lulz, and the loot. The same applies to ANY of the current pvp engagement profiles.

All this does is let players engage in good fights without having to get blueballed or blobbed - neither of which is fun.
Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-06-15 16:40:57 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Old Pervert wrote:



Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP.


No I went though a game adding an area, it killed all the PvP outside of it.


The PvP happening because of the "strategy/politic game" in EVE would still happen but people doing PvP for the sake of it would go to arenas because there would be content there instead of looking for someone across the EVE universe who want to engage you.


I agree completely. The people looking for PVP just to PVP could go there, where they would have more fun. Which last I checked is the goal of a game.

Eve would not be any safer for the ratters because there will always be people who like to curb stomp rattlesnakes and carriers.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#14 - 2017-06-15 17:16:33 UTC
Old Pervert wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Old Pervert wrote:



Anyone complaining that an arena would kill PVP outside of said arena is simply too used to the idea of ganking PVE fit ships and calling that PVP.


No I went though a game adding an area, it killed all the PvP outside of it.


The PvP happening because of the "strategy/politic game" in EVE would still happen but people doing PvP for the sake of it would go to arenas because there would be content there instead of looking for someone across the EVE universe who want to engage you.


I agree completely. The people looking for PVP just to PVP could go there, where they would have more fun. Which last I checked is the goal of a game.

You fail to see that these people need targets. Roaming around dozens upon dozens of systems is not exactly the biggest fun generator in this game. With arenas, however, this will become the norm because all the targets switch to the instant fights instead of looking for them. First, the casuals and usually victims will leave for arenas because they are fed up of getting dunked. Next are the casual roamers who do stuff here and there and rely on targets in a given area to find their fights/victims. Once they are gone, the die hard PVP pros will also have lost their targets and thus PVP dies out outside arenas.
I could have the order wrong and instead the die hard PVPers go first because they will find a lot more victims in arenas than they could ever find in open roaming settings, simply because they get delivered to them on a silver platter. And no restriction whatsoever (not SP, ship value, ship type, group size type or other) will prevent that more experienced people will keep whelping other less experienced people in any fight setting.

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.

Pleasure Hub Node-514
Pleasure Hub Hotline
#15 - 2017-06-15 17:27:40 UTC
I'd rather CCP give me the option to jettison objects into the sun.

'One night hauler' The tell all story of a pleasure bot in Jita 4-4

Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#16 - 2017-06-15 17:36:49 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:

You fail to see that these people need targets. Roaming around dozens upon dozens of systems is not exactly the biggest fun generator in this game. With arenas, however, this will become the norm because all the targets switch to the instant fights instead of looking for them. First, the casuals and usually victims will leave for arenas because they are fed up of getting dunked. Next are the casual roamers who do stuff here and there and rely on targets in a given area to find their fights/victims. Once they are gone, the die hard PVP pros will also have lost their targets and thus PVP dies out outside arenas.
I could have the order wrong and instead the die hard PVPers go first because they will find a lot more victims in arenas than they could ever find in open roaming settings, simply because they get delivered to them on a silver platter. And no restriction whatsoever (not SP, ship value, ship type, group size type or other) will prevent that more experienced people will keep whelping other less experienced people in any fight setting.


And you fail to accurately estimate the opportunistic nature of Eve players.

Imagine a world where everyone PVPs in arenas. You hate this world. You want to roam around. So... you roam old school. You enter into pockets, you find people, you bait fights. There will still be people there doing their isk generating activities, and they'll still need to have standing fleets to respond to people like you. They'll still be free to drop 15 supers on you for lulz.

PVP will not be dead, and roaming will not be dead. The goal of roaming in nullsec was never to run into another roaming group. The goal is to either kill their PVE ships as a means of baiting them into a PVP fight.

That remains a viable option, so long as those players are out in space. Which they will be. The flaw in your argument is that you assume all the "targets" will be gone. They won't be.

As I mentioned in my first reply no stations, no citadels, no pos, no pve within 6 jumps of the concord titan. This ensures that your targets will still have a home system somewhere that they'll be doing "stuff" in to pay for the ships they lose in this arena.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#17 - 2017-06-15 18:35:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
You fail to realize that there is nothing left to bait. Everyone uses intel scraping tools these days to notify you way in advance of incoming neutrals. All that roams will encounter are tethered up or docked up ratters or after dozens of jumps a single unaware ratter in a worthless ship.

This is already happening in ares like drone space or the south east. The thing that you call a flaw in my argument is in fact you not realizing the realities in null sec today. And these realities will be magnified with arenas.

Adding to this, your rules make little sense, #1 and #4 in particular. For #1, such a system does not exist in low sec. Do you want to say you have to create entire new regions devoid of anything just to make this viable?
And #4 can be easily circumvented by long range fun ships like T1 ewar attacking the opponent every now and then to prevent anti-griefing timers, something that people already do with ganking and attacking the gank target after it logged off in order to prevent banable use of exploits. Just as an example.

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.

Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#18 - 2017-06-15 19:10:55 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
You fail to realize that there is nothing left to bait. Everyone uses intel scraping tools these days to notify you way in advance of incoming neutrals. All that roams will encounter are tethered up or docked up ratters or after dozens of jumps a single unaware ratter in a worthless ship.

This is already happening in ares like drone space or the south east. The thing that you call a flaw in my argument is in fact you not realizing the realities in null sec today. And these realities will be magnified with arenas.

Adding to this, your rules make little sense, #1 and #4 in particular. For #1, such a system does not exist in low sec. Do you want to say you have to create entire new regions devoid of anything just to make this viable?
And #4 can be easily circumvented by long range fun ships like T1 ewar attacking the opponent every now and then to prevent anti-griefing timers, something that people already do with ganking and attacking the gank target after it logged off in order to prevent banable use of exploits. Just as an example.



I do live in drone space, and you're exactly right. When a roam heads our way, we dock up the PVE ships and fit into PVP ships. If the fight's worth taking we take it and dunk the roamers. If not, we blueball them. The only time we fight outside of our own choice is when we've got a rorq or something sieged and/or tackled which does occasionally happen.

Does that sound fun to you, as the roamer, knowing that we just blueball you if we can't/won't dunk you with carriers?

That won't change with the inclusion of arenas. We'll still need isk.

Needing isk means ratting, it means mining, it means all the things it already means. When you come into pocket, still the only reason we'll be forced to fight a potentially one-sided battle is when we have a rorq sieged. The rest of the time, we'll blueball you the same as we did before.

You'll still be able to come into pocket, either solo or with a roam, and get the exact same willingness to engage from us. We'll fight you if we believe we'll win, we'll ignore you if we think we'll lose.

The only difference is now you can choose to go somewhere that people don't have any intent to blueball you.

As for my stipulations:
1) Yes, new space. Completely cut off from the gates. Considering how blatantly easy it would be for CCP to procedurally instantiate empty systems, I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand.
4) You can also choose to go and grief rookies in rookie systems if you want to. Doesn't mean a GM won't beat you into submission if the TOS prohibit griefing (which in those systems it does). Basic automated mechanisms will prevent the most common griefing, GM banhammers or similar will prevent/resolve the rest. Deciding whether or not the opposing player is griefing becomes a GM decision. We as players all know damn well when we're griefing.
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#19 - 2017-06-15 19:33:20 UTC
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
I'd rather CCP give me the option to jettison objects into the sun.


I'd rather CCP give me the option to jettison F&I posters into the sun.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Old Pervert
Perkone
Caldari State
#20 - 2017-06-15 19:36:41 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Pleasure Hub Node-514 wrote:
I'd rather CCP give me the option to jettison objects into the sun.


I'd rather CCP give me the option to jettison F&I posters into the sun.


Jettisoning people into the sun would be too quick.
123Next page