Player Features and Ideas Discussion

One isk sink in the game is station repair bills, however thanks to hull and armor repairers, only solo pvpers in NPC space and players in a real hurry to undock wind up paying the cost to repair their ships. Module repair is almost unheard of too, since most pve players never overheat, and most pvp pilots use nanite paste instead of repairing them in station for convenience sake.

It is obvious that the ISK sink in repair bills is spotty and hardly effective in regards to how much effectiveness it COULD have in the removal of ISK from the game. To combat inflation, and to create a level of immersion to eve, I wonder if the idea of 'ship wear' for ship modules could be introduced. i'm making these edits because I don't think I clearly pointed out that this mechanic is ONLY FOR MODULES not for ships.

Ship wear would (amendments to proposal (10/16/2012) marked with *):
1) accumulate on modules over time, and only be repairable through nanite paste (costly) or drydock repairs.
2) work using the same damage mechanic that heat does (saves us the trouble of a new or confusing interface.)
3) accumulate faster based on module use. Passive modules wear over time, active ones wear by usage.
4) Ship wear would average a required dry-dock repair once every week or so for passive modules. Active module wear should be ballanced to be roughly the same amount of wear as passive modules if a player were running missions pretty regularly
5) only accumulate on undocked ships in space (docking would and should stop ships from wearing out.)
*6) POS's should be able to repair modules so that this mechanic doesn't unfairly effect people who live in wormholes
*7) damage would only be applied to ships actively being flown in space (i.e. you could abandon a ship and no wear would occur)

Ship wear would NOT:
1) ever cause a ship to break that receives regular attention, and hasn't been left out inside a POS force-field.
2) interfere with AFK cloaking (unless you do it for more than a few days without nanite paste)
*3) there would be no increase on prices for repairs, or demand for payment for repairs from any source which already gives them for free (i.e 0.0 stations, nanite paste etc) or any proposed source (i.e. POS's)


If there's a number-head out there maybe we could crunch this isk sink's viability, but I think it would be possible to remove trillions from the economy a year this way. It would also put a real cost to the equipment you put on the ship (t2 of course being more expensive to repair) and make another key decision on what to fit, and why.

Thoughts? Am I off my rocker here? Could this work? I'm sure the idea needs refinement at the least.

This would discourage people from having ships stockpiled ready to go, damaging the market.

mechanically, the problem is, once a ship is repackaged, it is no longer a unique item in the database, its now a general object of whatever ship type it was.

This means that you could avoid the routine maintenance on your ship by repackaging it once every so often.

Also, i think you may over estimate the amount of isk this would take out of the system.

notice, the wear ONLY occurs while your ship is undocked. You can keep 10000 ships fitted in your hangar for 10000 years for all the mechanic cares. The idea is though that when you take a ship OUT it takes damage to modules.

Additionally, you CANNOT get around this mechanic by repacking modules, since you cannot repackage damaged modules.

I did mention it at first, note point 5 in the first section of the OP.

I can definately see the issue with POS's. Perhaps this is a ballence issue that could be addressed with this upcoming round of changes to POS's. It seems kind of silly that you can't repair modules from a ship 'maintenance' array.

as far as costs I don't think it would be as intense as you think it would be. Repairing a burned out and heavily damaged t2 fitted Battle Cruiser costs me about 1 million ISK in an NPC station. This cost wouldn't affect players in sov 0.0 since they have stations from which they already get free repairs. I see the primary impact of this hitting mission runners, miners, and ratters in NPC 0.0, who sit with their mouths on the faucet 23/7.

TBH, your average PVP pilot probably doesn't spend enough time in space to get any more than a mild wear on his shiney t2 guns. Mostly we sit around and spin ships in stations.

I'm not sure I understand why people feel like this would some how limit their fittings. I fit and unfit damaged and burned out modules on my ship all the time. The only thing you CAN"T do is repackage them for resale until they're repaired. Perhaps you can explain this concern in more detail?

but you are forgetting for the skilled and lucky pvp ships don't always go boom. So in a good couple nights a 0.0 resident can go from ratting ships (me I ran a few to spice it up), to hacs and/or bc's on roams, run say 2 different BS for 2 ops (we'll say 1 sr fleet rigged and one lr rigged or maybe they x-trained and one day they feel like an apoch next night a rokh). All said and done they are repairing several ships if they come home in one piece.

As not all 0.0 types are isk barons, this will get pricey for the people who may not make much isk when say on long campaigns.

Your isk sink is hurting people who actually play the game as intended basically. this isn't hurting the carebears farming isk in empire. Unless truly motivated to splurge on say a NM for blood/sansha, machs for angels, tengu's for gurista....its generally one ship to run them all. No skin off thier nose really.

I have more than 100 ships around to be versatile, prepared and not get bored with 1-2 ships... Lately I have become a little inactive due to RL, other friends not playing much and generally being fed up with certain shiptypes and game mechanics not creating a versatile environment for me. However something like this would likely force me to stop playing as my wallet would eventually empty out while I am not playing enough to earn sufficient amounts of isk.

If you want more isk sinks you should make a suggestion that won't hit the wrong people. But in all honesty I think the current Eve universe would benefit way more from reducing the isk coming into the game instead. This will likely hit 0.0 people the most as ratting and doing missions are practically the only real sources of generating isk (LP just moves isk from someone else).
50-60m pr hour is easy in 0.0 these days.

Pinky

now the new question, you sauid this efects ships right? pods are ships, do you propose pods be included in this? because while that will definetly screw wormholers, i fidn the idea of somebody getting their ship blown up, then accidentaly losing their pod and high-end implants midwarp out because they forgot to repair it...

I wish people would read more thoroughly. It would end a LOT of arguments. I guess they are too busy making pasta for the first time. (jk jk)

In all, I would welcome this sink, especially since it will be fairly cheap for the newcomer who can only fly frigates (few modules) and mostly hit battlecruisers and battleships (who have lots and lots of modules). perhaps it will encourage some actual variety into this game than "show up in vindicator, crap on everything, eat your isk biscuit that CONCORD throws at you" or some variation thereof involving a super-powerful battleship.



Something for capital pilots that I'd like to add: they can effect repairs onto smaller craft in space if the person in the smaller craft right-clicked on the capital ship after getting within 2.5km and selecting a 'repair' option.

depending on settings that capital pilots set (default is 'no' to all but unaggressed corp mates), the pilot in the ship to be repaired will be prompted to confirm, with an isk quote that, if enabled, would give the cap pilot a quarter of the isk.

settings included allowed lists (by standings, corp, or alliance), disallowing those with aggression to use the repair function, and amount charged.

note that this would only be for fixing MODULE DAMAGE, NOT ARMOR or HULL DAMAGE. Remote armor and hull reppers exist for that you ponce. <--THIS LINE IS IMPORTANT

the mechanic that I've introduced also ONLY EFFECTS MODULES, is that close enough? :d

also, sorry for jumping on your idea with an idea. It sort of happens with me