These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP: Let pirates be pirates and let the heavenly powers that be sort it out.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
#1 - 2012-05-24 23:38:26 UTC
Just get rid of Concorde and High Sec and be done with it. Pirate Yarrrr!!
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2012-05-24 23:43:41 UTC
For PvP and like to encourage more of it?

Want to validate a potential Career path in ≡v≡ with new income potential that is ideally designed as simply a transferance of ISK from one pilot to another?

Actually like situations where ships shoot back and "really" improve your KB resume?

You agree that pilots should adapt to challenging situations in ≡v≡ where acceptance of risk is an everyday seperator of those getting ahead on the curve?

Or simply want to make ≡v≡ less boring?

Support: Bounty Hunting for CSM7.

CCP Design panel wrote:

"It's going to be awesome."

"It's absolutley on the list of things to do."

"We have a spaceships game, but you can't be han solo or boba fett, that's not clever."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_pLi1J9YrkM#t=1199s

Bounty Hunting - Soon (™): Retribution (Winter 2012)

It's just criminal - Smuggling
Zoe Athame
Don't Lose Your Way
#3 - 2012-05-24 23:50:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Zoe Athame
When you think about it, the safest high security systems are those in the depths of nullsec. If all of EVE space was held via sovereignty, the gameplay would probably be much better all around. Trading would actually be interesting if you had to convoy between actual different hubs owned by separate alliances and not just people who are closer to Jita or Amarr. Carebears would have actual safety but at the same time PvPers could conquer their space rather than just suicide it. EVE would become truely emergent.

The biggest problems i can see though would be.
1. New Players would have to be assigned to major alliances.
Potential solution: Civilian Corps that are seperate from actual government/military corps.

2. Too much Sov is a burden.
Potential solution: Rework the sov system to one that encourages you to own more space and can be flipped easily. The fringe systems would be constantly changing but the inner safe systems would be where the alliance hangs out.

3. Too much power is a burden.
Potential Solution: CCP gives major alliance leaders a paycheck so they can quit their job to actually manage an entire EVE country/faction!
Ginseng Jita
PAN-EVE TRADING COMPANY
#4 - 2012-05-25 01:31:14 UTC
Zoe Athame wrote:
When you think about it, the safest high security systems are those in the depths of nullsec. If all of EVE space was held via sovereignty, the gameplay would probably be much better all around. Trading would actually be interesting if you had to convoy between actual different hubs owned by separate alliances and not just people who are closer to Jita or Amarr. Carebears would have actual safety but at the same time PvPers could conquer their space rather than just suicide it. EVE would become truely emergent.

The biggest problems i can see though would be.
1. New Players would have to be assigned to major alliances.
Potential solution: Civilian Corps that are seperate from actual government/military corps.

2. Too much Sov is a burden.
Potential solution: Rework the sov system to one that encourages you to own more space and can be flipped easily. The fringe systems would be constantly changing but the inner safe systems would be where the alliance hangs out.

3. Too much power is a burden.
Potential Solution: CCP gives major alliance leaders a paycheck so they can quit their job to actually manage an entire EVE country/faction!


Nah mate, just add real penalties and consequences for players actions. Until that happens lawlessness will always plague the game at all levels. The bounty system is a joke. Concorde has no sting. Crime pays.