These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online: Revolution (0.0 THEME FOR WINTER EXPANSION)

First post
Author
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#21 - 2013-08-05 18:52:30 UTC
All of this would be a vast improvement over the current system. +1
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-08-05 18:53:50 UTC
EI Digin wrote:

  • Remove barriers to entry that don't involve shooting bad guys who can shoot back: logistics work, diplomacy work and IT work.

  • Was going to say I stopped reading here, because the idea that CCP could design the need for either of these out of the game is ridiculous and silly. Kept reading, though, and I think at least some of the concepts are interesting & have merit.

    Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

    publordicus maximus
    Doomheim
    #23 - 2013-08-05 18:55:00 UTC
    :staredog:
    Kismeteer
    Bat Country
    Pandemic Horde
    #24 - 2013-08-05 18:59:42 UTC
    Missing the most important key ingredient: Want people to move out of hi-sec? Nerf level 4 missions. It's a known issue, has been for years. Want to make real money? Then give some risk for some real reward.
    Andski
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #25 - 2013-08-05 19:05:05 UTC
    Kismeteer wrote:
    Missing the most important key ingredient: Want people to move out of hi-sec? Nerf level 4 missions. It's a known issue, has been for years. Want to make real money? Then give some risk for some real reward.


    It's even more ridiculous that you have people in 0.0 alliances that hold low truesec, upgraded systems and don't bother to use that, instead opting to fund their PvP with highsec incursion alts.

    Twitter: @EVEAndski

    "It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

    Glowstix
    Kaesong Kosmonauts
    #26 - 2013-08-05 19:07:26 UTC
    I can dig it.
    Katrina Oniseki
    Oniseki-Raata Internal Watch
    Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
    #27 - 2013-08-05 20:02:31 UTC
    Good stuff.

    Katrina Oniseki

    Petya Gladiator
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #28 - 2013-08-05 20:51:20 UTC
    Some interesting points. I like it.
    salnese godson
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #29 - 2013-08-05 21:00:49 UTC
    +1
    Alundil
    Rolled Out
    #30 - 2013-08-05 21:31:41 UTC
    This is a great place to start the discussions about what the 0.0 game needs. Excellent work OP.
    +6

    I'm right behind you

    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #31 - 2013-08-05 22:03:59 UTC

    Frankly, your system is missing a MAJOR component....

    Use your space, or risk easily losing your space!!!

    You need a dynamic number of RF timers!

    I'd call it a Sov Index:
    If people don't use their space, they get NO RF timers.
    If they utilize their space lightly, they get 1 RF timer...
    If they use properly, they get 2 or 3 RF timers...

    To give an example with our current system;

    Sov Index = Sum of all military & Industrial indexes in the constellation / 2x Number of systems in constellation.

    Round down... If you heavily use your system, it will be a 4 (or even 5) == 4 RF timers to defend your stuff. If you don't use the system at all, it would be a zero, so anyone could come destroy your TCU/IHUB and place their own in a single military move!

    Next, your Industrial and Capital bonuses are broken:
    If I can generate "extra minerals" simply by building something, reprocess it, build ti again, reprocess it... you have a mineral faucet that will be exploited and break the mineral supply of EvE. This would ruin EvE's player-run economy.

    Likewise, if I can make 15% profit by selling my alt 400b isk in modules, only to have him trade it back to me so I can make another 15% profit selling my alt 400b isk in modules... you just broke EvE's currency, and make isk worthless.

    Perhaps you weren't suggesting creating ridiculous loopholes like that, but I thought I'd double check!!!
    Albert Spear
    Non scholae sed vitae
    #32 - 2013-08-05 22:40:30 UTC
    In general I like the idea of not having to spend a year planning a move to Nulsec to be successful. That is one of the big drawbacks to me.

    Being able to hold a system by being very active in it as suggested in one of the posts is something that I like, there are many systems I fly though that are owned but constantly empty.

    Nerf'ing L4 missions wont get a lot of people to move out, I can make enough in a day mining and building stuff to equal most L4 mission running. No the nerf bat is not the answer, making Nulsec more attractive is the answer.

    Most of Nul seems to be solo play, until you get to blob fleets - then it is so big it is impersonal most of the time. Nul roams are fun, but I don't need to live in nul to do those.

    Fleet mining ops are mostly for highsec, and they can be a day of fun with people on team speak catching up with each other. Mining does not have to be boring, if you have the right friends.

    Maybe I am weird, but right now there is nothing to attract me to Nul, nothing at all. If I want a roam, I can do it and go home. I can buy the minerals and other nulsec products in a market hub, who needs nulsec?

    Until it gets more attractive, nulsec if for people who like to solo until it is time to blob up.
    EI Digin
    irc.zulusquad.org
    #33 - 2013-08-05 23:51:09 UTC
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

    Next, your Industrial and Capital bonuses are broken:
    If I can generate "extra minerals" simply by building something, reprocess it, build ti again, reprocess it... you have a mineral faucet that will be exploited and break the mineral supply of EvE. This would ruin EvE's player-run economy.

    Likewise, if I can make 15% profit by selling my alt 400b isk in modules, only to have him trade it back to me so I can make another 15% profit selling my alt 400b isk in modules... you just broke EvE's currency, and make isk worthless.

    Perhaps you weren't suggesting creating ridiculous loopholes like that, but I thought I'd double check!!!


    You are correct that breaking the game is not something I'm looking to do and that bonus is in fact broken.

    The bonuses need to be sufficiently powerful so that, as the previous poster has pointed out, people have a good reason to move to nullsec.
    Capqu
    Half Empty
    xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
    #34 - 2013-08-06 00:13:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
    cool

    i dont like "shrinking" the numbers via systems->constellations

    and i think there should be more npc clusters similar to npc delve/fountain - for non-sov null entities to "live"

    but everything else is cool
    Gizznitt Malikite
    Agony Unleashed
    Agony Empire
    #35 - 2013-08-06 01:47:52 UTC
    EI Digin wrote:
    Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

    Next, your Industrial and Capital bonuses are broken:
    If I can generate "extra minerals" simply by building something, reprocess it, build ti again, reprocess it... you have a mineral faucet that will be exploited and break the mineral supply of EvE. This would ruin EvE's player-run economy.

    Likewise, if I can make 15% profit by selling my alt 400b isk in modules, only to have him trade it back to me so I can make another 15% profit selling my alt 400b isk in modules... you just broke EvE's currency, and make isk worthless.

    Perhaps you weren't suggesting creating ridiculous loopholes like that, but I thought I'd double check!!!


    You are correct that breaking the game is not something I'm looking to do and that bonus is in fact broken.

    The bonuses need to be sufficiently powerful so that, as the previous poster has pointed out, people have a good reason to move to nullsec.


    For industry: Make the system bonus essentially be a +x ME / +x PE to all manufacturing jobs. There is a point that adding more ME or PE to a Blueprint does nothing. At the same time, invented jobs for t2 items generally start at -4/-4. If the system boost were +10 ME, then building ships in that system would become very profitable. Same with t2 ammo (as for t2 modules, not so much).

    For Market.... there isn't much you can do that won't be easily exploitable. I suppose you could eliminate all broker fees and sales taxes without issue, but outside of a major trade hub that probably won't be major incentive to trade. Another idea, as you've been mentioning the "difficulty" of nullsec logistics, is you could have up to "x" m3 of NPC Courier service to/from the Hub each week. This would blatantly compete with player logistics, and would have to be very limited or else it's simply inappropriate (like max 2.5k m3 per week or less), and delivery is to/from only a few very specific highsec systems.

    Also, I'm very serious that all sov needs to become very difficult to defend when people aren't using their space. This is the only way sov will balance out, as anything less will result in large coallitions taking and controlling space they don't need, want, or utilize. Big groups can, will, and should still roll in and kick people at whenever they want, but the point is any joe blow alliances should be able to destroy the claim on any constellation they aren't using. This essentially makes it pointless to claim a system before you can work it.
    Neverlasting Fear
    Oruze Cruise
    White Stag Exit Bag
    #36 - 2013-08-06 02:12:19 UTC
    Keep up the good work, this is definitely a start to something that could be great.
    Yaturi
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #37 - 2013-08-06 02:50:35 UTC
    seems legit +1
    Apocryphal Noise
    The Harpooner's Rest
    #38 - 2013-08-06 03:46:59 UTC
    Having rental systems supported by in-game mechanics is an awful idea. It needs to continue to be a player created system.
    Verb Object
    Dreddit
    Test Alliance Please Ignore
    #39 - 2013-08-06 04:10:55 UTC
    I like it.
    Dirk Action
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #40 - 2013-08-06 04:34:33 UTC
    Apocryphal Noise wrote:
    Having rental systems supported by in-game mechanics is an awful idea. It needs to continue to be a player created system.


    I assume you're just taking an exceptionally long time writing out why you think this instead of adding nothing to the discussion?