These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

If you could change 3 mechanics in EVE...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rory Orlenard
Eve Pilots Revolutionary Army
#41 - 2012-04-02 06:05:03 UTC
Serena Wilde wrote:
Rory Orlenard wrote:
Your number two idea i disagree with..the "no more role specific ships" . that smacks all to much of a uni-ship. when you get a uni-ship everyone flys the uniship, using the same setup, which is not good for the Eve economy, fun gaming,or anything else.

I don't want to be cruel here but i suggest you put more research and thought into game mechanichs..or however you spell it before sounding off on what seems like an idea.

As for an idea of my own i came up with only one - less time differential between what the Eve map info shows and what is real.
While screwing with nullsec alliances I relie heavy on the Eve map and the time lag between reported info and real conditions can get you killed.


So if every ship is a uni-ship, everyone flies...every ship? How is this bad?

I don't think you're thinking deep enough, sorry.

I do agree with your idea in theory, but I don't think any intel should be "instant" unless there is a body on site physically reporting it.


Hmmmm..i see what you mean although i don't like admitting it. Real time info should be protected as valuable and not given to any one for free ...maybe just less time differential for a comprimise
Gunther Nhilathok
Doomheim
#42 - 2012-04-02 06:13:38 UTC
I would reduce all ships' tank capacity and add various countermeasure modules/cm ammo and add slots to most ships to accomodate cm modules. (kind of like rig slots but only for CM mods) Examples would be adding a defender missle launcher to the category or adding the good old decoy beacon method to confuse tracking systems. Or rather instead of defender missle launcher, perhaps a system that sends out pulses that disrupt missle tracking. Could have it run on some kind of charge so that it's not something cap dependent and still consumes ammo.


I would remove ECM alltogether as it's little more than a bastardization of the meaning of my number one change.

I would replace ECM with a module set that reduced the effectiveness of Counter-Measure charges. A tracking system disruptor for defender missle launchers and a decoy beacon dampener for the decoy beacon launcher. Or if the missle tracking disruption pulse is used, could have a module that directly tweaks the magnitude of it's broadcast.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#43 - 2012-04-02 06:28:20 UTC
Serena Wilde wrote:
What would they be?

Just a simple question, but try to offer reasoning why and what you would change it to.

1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems
[...]
3) No more local as an "Intel source"


Those are two good ones, Local certainly would be on my list, and the gates might very well make third place.


It's really tough to put what change I wanted in a simple statement about a single mechanic, as it would be made with the goal of making all gameplay either player Sandbox driven or Lore driven, or both, but no more Themepark rides. If there was a single mechanic to change toward that goal it would have to be....

1) Remove CONCORD and Crimewatch. CONCORD could stay on as a Faction and have ships slightly better than Sleepers/Sansha but the days of stifling the Sandbox would be at an end. Faction Navy could stay on, albeit also somewhat weakened and who's reaction are based off character relations to them rather than CCP trying to police player behavior in order to handhold Themepark players.
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#44 - 2012-04-02 06:28:42 UTC
Remove local
Remove missions/incursions
Remove CONCORD
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#45 - 2012-04-02 06:41:46 UTC
1- make high sec really high sec: you couldn't even target another player if you wouldn't be a logi in the same fleet.

2- player corporations wallet and income: minimum 5 to 10% tax mandatory for any positive transaction in corporations wallet
More NPC stations in null sec and services but stations destructible like player owned ones with just triple hp points for reinforcement and kill, respawn delay 29D

3- after leaving high sec once you can't return any more. Your assets are all automatically transferred to the closest NPC station in low sec
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2012-04-02 06:42:31 UTC
Change mining
Change belts
Change ores

We really need a industrial overhaul and mining is the place to start.
Rory Orlenard
Eve Pilots Revolutionary Army
#47 - 2012-04-02 06:46:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Rory Orlenard
Serena Wilde wrote:
What would they be?

Just a simple question, but try to offer reasoning why and what you would change it to.


1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems - I don't find it right that jumping into the next system could lead to your death with no real way to circumvent it -

.... my reply to your point ...if someone has Sov they deserve the right to have inbound - asking them to cover the system is not reasonable and as someone who screws with all the null alliances gatecamps and bubbles don't mean much to an experienced scout. the number of guys who can catch you is small. the current eve setup allows owners some rights and is only a threat to people leeching off them - if you want to screw with them it is no problem


3) No more local as an "Intel source" -

my reply.... totally agree, make it like wormholes and some alt sitting in a station never actually flown or doing anything can't protect the frontiers and the the Nidhogger can't blitz anomolies with immunity - that will fly like the Hindenberg with Nullsec guys so good luck on that.

Those are my ideas. How about yours?
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#48 - 2012-04-02 06:52:52 UTC
Nalha Saldana wrote:
Change mining
Change belts
Change ores

We really need a industrial overhaul and mining is the place to start.


This can be changed but as long as ships related to this activity are the joke they are there is no interest on doing this activity because ganking is more profitable than mining and meta game wouldn't make null or low sec more interesting for this.

As long as mining is interesting as it is and KM's farming goes, my Hulk and my Mack are there only to fill my hangar of useless ships collection.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#49 - 2012-04-02 07:18:31 UTC
- The distribution of all blueprints should go through NPC-corp specific LP stores with all an unique assortment of wares (still possible to resell on market though).
- Titans should be mobile stations with full docking, logging off and various other (inefficient) station services.
- The empire Factions should be split up by low-sec borders and made more diverse in terms of resources and NPC-corps (less blobbing in a single hub and more opportunities to make money.)

- NPC Pirates are their own faction and you can't use their NPC stations unless you and your corp have good standings so no farming sanctums while squatting in their stations!)

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Danfen Fenix
#50 - 2012-04-02 07:42:25 UTC
1) Something that makes fights take place in more places in a system than the usual gate or station P

How about makign it so warp bubbles drop out anyone in warp if they hit it/hit near it, no matter where the bubble is on the spacelane (i.e., so it can be put in the middle of nowhere between two gates).

2) Someway of decloaking or detecting cloaked ships, apart from flying within 2km of them.

Seriosuly. If local were to be removed, then cloakies would be completely OP just due to the fact that there is currently never any way of knowing they're there until you're most likely going to die!
Kiandoshia
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2012-04-02 08:20:12 UTC
1. Remove the forums.
2. Make everyone forget the forum existed.
3. Why am I even here =/
voetius
Grundrisse
#52 - 2012-04-02 08:36:07 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.


+1
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#53 - 2012-04-02 09:09:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
Serena Wilde wrote:
Most certainly not. I just want fights to not be determined blindly.


My point was that if you are using a scout of some kind, whether by multi-boxing or with friends, the fight is not blind. A fast scout can easily escape gate-camps in losec. Your scout can be anything from a noob ship to a covert T3. I recommend such things as covert frigates, bombers, Dramiels, or other fast frigates, so long as it has a microwarp drive

Quote:
I can see that, which is why I said to have them warp in at a spot X AU from the nearest object (sun/planet/moon/station etc.) or simply at the outer edge of the system. There are many ways to work around that idea. The point is now hunters will actually have to "hunt" rather than just wait for someone to pop their head in.


If the spot were random, it would be impossible to catch anyone ever. A person jumping in would be in warp long before any pirate could scan them down, arrive on grid, lock, and tackle. Once in warp, the ship is of course unstoppable. It would arrive at gate, and repeat the process. Gate to gate travel in losec would be 100% safe for all but the slowest aligning ships. Additionally, this would break fleet warping as every ship would arrive at a different location

If the spot is not random, but simply a spot in space that is predetermined, the campers can simply jump one of their own through and camp the arrival location just the same as the current gate location

Quote:
So your solution is to use only one type of ship when flying through low sec? ECM could work, if you could change your modules out in space later so you aren't tied to stations to do any other activities.


Of course not. Certain ships are better suited to solo travel. I noted those above. You can also travel in a decent-sized fleet. In that case you can fly whatever you want and have a reasonable chance of getting to your destination

ECM, like every other module in game, has its pros and cons. I cringe every time I see an ECM module fit to a nonbonuse
hull. The odds of jamming someone with a single ECM mod on an unbonused hull are not good. Even if you do, unless you bounce around the system while waiting for your aggression counter to expire, you will not be able to jump out of system when you arrive at the out gate

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#54 - 2012-04-02 09:59:27 UTC
1) Fix the bounty system.

2)Create more security options to POS structures, such as personal tabs idea suggested at fanfest.

3) Even More Ships!

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  
TheBlueMonkey
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2012-04-02 10:21:25 UTC
Serena Wilde wrote:

1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems
2) No more "role specific" ships
3) No more local as an "Intel source"


1 - Use an alt\have friends\you're missing the point of eve

2 - you're realy missing the point of eve.

3 - only smart thing you've said.
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#56 - 2012-04-02 10:43:30 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Serena Wilde wrote:
KrakizBad wrote:
1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.


Well, that's one idea. It's a good start I guess. Any others? And any reasons why?


It would be great if all NPC corp characters had one single forum section all to their selves. Then they could talk among themselves and not bother anyone else.


So people that choose to play in NPC like noobs would have no say.

Also your idea is so ******** anyway.
Create alt , create 1 man corp and now you can post.
Savage Creampuff
Vivid Entertainment Group
#57 - 2012-04-02 10:59:31 UTC
3 things that will never happen but i wouldn't object to if they did

1 - replace all chance based mechanics with mechanics that aren't chance based

2 - allow npc corp characters to pilot any ship in the game except for supercaps, caps, and tech 2 and 3 ships. it would be easy to rp why they wouldn't be allowed in cap ships and restricting tech 2 and 3 ship access removes no functionality or gameplay from the character.

3 - allow npc corp characters to post in the trial citizens forum and new citizens forums only
Adunh Slavy
#58 - 2012-04-02 11:19:02 UTC
1) Get rid of gates - plenty of ways to do it and still have non-consensual PVP with out the cheap mechanics of choke points.

2) Scaning and probing more like submarines and sonar - goes with number 1

3) Sec status mechanics

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Adunh Slavy
#59 - 2012-04-02 11:22:27 UTC
Serena Wilde wrote:
Ghoest wrote:
Remove gates.

The entire concept of outer space being 95% about going through gates is horrible game design.


The crux is how do you fix that? Especially with EVE's "everybody plays in the same world" mentality?



There are many ideas out there, below is one of them,

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/AdunhSlavy/RSIV611.htm

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Adunh Slavy
#60 - 2012-04-02 11:24:34 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Basically, bottle necks are a necessity for combat to occur frequently :)



No, the ability to find one another is what is needed.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt