These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ideas for Improved Gameplay and Eve Experience

First post
Author
KanmanDS
235MeV
#1 - 2012-11-16 17:01:07 UTC
In short, this is a list of suggestions to the devs for changes or additions to the game that would improve general gameplay and the eve experience. Some of the suggestions are simple and some are rather involved. I am not demanding they be introduced in to the game, but I am sure they are always open to at least hearing ideas. Anything to fuel their creative fires.

We will start with the simple ones and work our way to the outlandish ideas.

1) Fighters and drones should not just appear and disappear around the vessel.

They should launch out of the vessel properly, as seen in the game's own trailers. If you want to go all-out on this, you could make a hatch open and close on the hull of ships for drone launches and recalls.


2) Pilots docked in station should be able to see outside the station.

Much the same way we can see around our ship while in space, we should be able to see the undock while in station. It is a station. It has windows. Why am I completely blind to the outside world?


3) In null sec, it should be possible to build/deploy station guns around stations that can be owned.

We can defend our POS with guns, and even take control of them. Stations should be a next level to a POS. They should be strong (capable of killing capitals), and it should be possible to take control of them while docked in station. This ties together with idea 10 for improved sov defensive capabilities.

4) Modules/turrets on ships for remote armor and shield repairers.

Make it happen.


5) An end to the ability to bump massive vessels with small vessels.

Capitals are massive (millions of times the mass of frigates and cruisers). Thus it is stupid and ridiculous that capitals are so easily sent flying when impacted by these small vessels. Instead, make the small vessel bounce off with a nice shield shockwave effect as it bounces off the capital's shields.


6) A change to the way the 'orbit' command works.

There are one of two possible ways to make this better. The first is to have the tangential vector between my ship and the ship I want to orbit calculated and used as the basis for my orbital path. Thus my ship naturally flows fluently in to orbiting the target, rather than coming to a stop and turning to orbit the target along some random vector. This gives the pilot some control over the orbital plane they wish to use.

The second option would be that when the orbit command is given, disc appears in space, centered on the target vessel. You can grab and rotate the disc to the plane you want to orbit them. This is more involved but gives the pilot the most control over orbiting.


7) Self destructing a ship causes area of effect damage.

I will let you decide how much damage and how far it reaches. It just seems a self destruct should damage the ships around you.


8) Ship wrecks that are the same size and ship as the vessels lost.

A battlefield should not be reduced to a cluster of white triangles. There should be recognizable pieces of the ships lost floating around (again, as shown in the game's own trailers). I understand that this would tax system resources and make the game larger on our hard drives, but if we can have 8 different colors of catalyst, we can have better ship wrecks.


9) Pod Ejections.

When your ship is lost in combat, the ship should go through a 2-second animation of beginning to explode. During this 2-second period, the player's camera zooms in close to the ship's skin, where they see a small hatch open and their pod eject from the vessel. Then the ship explodes, leaving a ship wreck as described in idea 8.


10) TCUs give system-wide defensive fleet bonuses when under attack or in reinforcement.

Like idea 3, this improves sov defense capabilities.





Now, the really involved ideas, mostly centered around making SOME use of the avatars and in-station environment.

11) In-station battle during sov conquest.

This is one of my favorite ideas. After armor reinforcement, an in-station first person shooter battle unfolds. Capsuleers as well as mercenaries from Dust can participate in these fights. This makes a firm connection between the spaceship side of eve and the station/avatar side of the game. As usual, the captain's quarters are secure and safe if players do not wish to participate in the station battle while docked there.


12) The in-station environment MUST have windows that show an accurate rendering of the outside world.

If there are ships outside, I should be able to see them from the windows in-station.


13) Cyno Jammer Ship/Module.

This is another of my favorite ideas. A new ship, or a new ship module that prevents cynos from working nearby. Unlike the POS structure, this is not system-wide. This is more like a dictor bubble. Lets say at level 5 cyno-jammer, a cyno cannot be lit within 250km of the vessel. Thus protecting a fleet from hot drops. This could be an alternative use for the heavy dictor (bubble and/or cyno jammer).

The cyno jammer would also act as a cyno-suppressor to currently active cynos. If an existing cyno ends up inside the cyno-jamming field, while it remains present and the host ship still cannot move, no ships can jump to that cyno until the cyno-jamming ship is destroyed or moves out of range. The cyno animation will need to display this suppression though a change in size or color.
Aziesta
Binal Extensions
Xagenic Freymvork
#2 - 2012-11-16 17:07:30 UTC
KanmanDS
235MeV
#3 - 2012-11-16 17:17:00 UTC
Thanks. Reposted in correct section. Cheers.
Elvis Fett
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-11-17 16:07:44 UTC
F & I is where good ideas go to die. You posted in the right place if you want more than 3 people to read it. Besides the fact few people read F&I, the whole section is all stickies (except 7 posts), so any good ideas you post get taken off the first page almost instantly and drops into oblivion.

Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#5 - 2012-11-17 16:15:18 UTC
Elvis Fett wrote:
F & I is where good ideas go to die. You posted in the right place if you want more than 3 people to read it. Besides the fact few people read F&I, the whole section is all stickies (except 7 posts), so any good ideas you post get taken off the first page almost instantly and drops into oblivion.



Good ideas manage to do quite well anywhere they're posted. The F&I "problem" is that all ideas go there and most of them aren't even worth commenting on, so it's a bad place to get a discussion going or if you want attention from other players. On the positive side it's absolutely the right place to post, if you're mainly just interested in devs taking a look at your ideas.
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#6 - 2012-11-17 18:11:23 UTC
Moved from General Discussion.

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

Sunglasses At Midnight
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2012-11-17 18:23:24 UTC
Here's my responses, numbered for your convenience:

1.) Yes. CCP seems to be going in this direction already with the addition of visible drone bays on drone ships- this would be a great addition to the game, and probably not too graphics- intensive.

2.) Yes. Well... you might expand this idea to include upgradeable captain's quarters. Level one would have no windows or anything. Level two would have video feeds. Level three would have a large window showing the undock point.

3.) No. I understand that people want stronger POS's, but allowing people who don't care enough to go and actively defend their POS with ships to anchor large and heavily armed stations would be stupid.

4.) Yes. It would make so much sense to have modules for RR's.

5.) No. Bumping should still occur, however, CCP should make an equation to determine the severity of bumps that compares the masses of two vessels. For example, a 10,000 ton ship bumping a 100,000 ton ship would be bumped 10x more severe than the 100,000 ton ship.

6.) Yes. The second option, with a rotating disk to control orientation, might fit in nicely with the new UI upgrades.

7.) Yes- but with limitations. This would be easily abused if it allowed freighters to make a huge capital ship explosion- imagine Jita full of people self- destructing freighters instead of smartbomb ships or Tornados. It should be relative to the capacitor size of the ship, not the ship size itself: this would make more sense with regards to both physics and balancing.

8.) Yes. There are already mission wrecks for ships that include pieces of the ships themselves- the models exist, they only need implementation.

9.) Yes. However, it should be done so the attacking ship's lock on the exploding ship is removed when it begins to explode, letting them know that the other ship is dead and giving them a chance to target the pod.

10.) No. CCP has said many times that they want to nerf/ remove off- grid boosting. This might make sense lore- wise, but would be a broken mechanic.

11.) Yes. However, this wouldn't be balanced if the POS went out of reinforced if the attackers won. A more balanced mechanic would scale drops by whoever won, that is, if the defenders won, the drops from the POS if it was destroyed after would be terrible. If the attackers won, the drops would be great if it was destroyed. The percentage of drops would scale to how badly either team lost.

12.) Refer back to my response in 2. You should be able to upgrade your captain's quarters to display a view of the undock point- imagine just watching the ships go by. So cool...

13.) Yes- but with limitations. If you put one of these on a Titan, you could conceivably keep it away from capitals for the course of an entire battle- and titans are strong enough as they are without being allowed to deny cynos within 250km. How about a class of ship, "Super Heavy Interdictors": battleship interdictors that can fit this module and warp disruption fields. That way, the jamming ship could be killed, but we'd see use in gang fights as well, or capital defense.

That's my take. I'm open to responses or criticisms, though.