These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Suggestion for a new form of hybrid PvE/PvP content: Distress Calls
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gisander
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#81 - 2013-11-01 14:42:08 UTC
+1

Although I think it needs more variants than just this one scenario, I am all for these random PvE PvP hybrid self regulated live event ideas.
ElQuirko
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2013-11-04 12:55:43 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
- As the attackers will win without capsuleer interference anyway, fighting for the attackers does not offer rewards unless at least twenty capsuleers fight for the defenders.


This would encourage silly imbalance between the teams; it'd only be worth attacking once 20 defenders are present and then very few people are going to fancy attacking a team of 20 people without their own squad, resulting in the defender team continuously and disproportionately swelling.

Might I suggest that the pirate corporation rewards the attackers for every player ship killed (with a multiplier depending on how many defenders are present) and a separate reward for portion of damage done to the NPC capital? Maybe large amounts of LP for the player kill (multiplied by ship class) and a proportional amount of ISK for the NPC kill? That way it encourages players to both engage other players and assist the pirates in attacking the capital, rather than just letting them get on with it and going for player loot. Giving the pirate-players LPs also means that, if they want to earn money from killing players, it can come from loot and bounties, whilst a lack of immediate ISK reward also points them towards shooting at the capital.

Dodixie > Hek
Enteron Anabente
Provident Provisions
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#83 - 2013-11-04 14:50:41 UTC
+1. I think it needs a little tuning, but the basic idea is a good one.
Frozen Chief
Doomheim
#84 - 2013-11-04 14:52:13 UTC
This is a great idea, I doubt Id do much of it, but still a great one.
Jythier Smith
BGG Wolves
#85 - 2013-11-12 17:49:21 UTC
Have some sort of system that doesn't allow unbalanced teams, based on ship class... ie, if there are lots of defenders, add more NPC attackers to make up for it, so that being an attacker doesn't automatically kill you.
Dragonv2
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#86 - 2013-11-12 18:22:05 UTC
this sounds like great fun to do +1 from me
Weasel Leblanc
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2013-11-12 18:53:13 UTC
My only regret is that I have but one upvote to give for this idea.

That, and the fact I didn't think of it first.
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2013-11-12 22:29:13 UTC
+1

nice idea i see one small problem.

how do u handle a lets say 40 man attacker fleet and only 20 defender, both with the same combo. It has to be balanced else most semi carebears in hs wont do it.

sidenote: nice way to introduce a isk sink and a distress call should be repeated every minute and a beacon should appear no scanning
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#89 - 2013-11-12 22:41:30 UTC
ElQuirko wrote:
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
- As the attackers will win without capsuleer interference anyway, fighting for the attackers does not offer rewards unless at least twenty capsuleers fight for the defenders.


This would encourage silly imbalance between the teams; it'd only be worth attacking once 20 defenders are present and then very few people are going to fancy attacking a team of 20 people without their own squad, resulting in the defender team continuously and disproportionately swelling.

Might I suggest that the pirate corporation rewards the attackers for every player ship killed (with a multiplier depending on how many defenders are present) and a separate reward for portion of damage done to the NPC capital? Maybe large amounts of LP for the player kill (multiplied by ship class) and a proportional amount of ISK for the NPC kill? That way it encourages players to both engage other players and assist the pirates in attacking the capital, rather than just letting them get on with it and going for player loot. Giving the pirate-players LPs also means that, if they want to earn money from killing players, it can come from loot and bounties, whilst a lack of immediate ISK reward also points them towards shooting at the capital.


Excellent idea.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#90 - 2013-11-12 23:02:33 UTC
Very cool idea. Absolutely no good way to implement it in wormholes though.
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2013-11-13 09:03:11 UTC
me again ^^

thing is maybe u choose a site when u warp to it, join a fleet with eve comms activated (u get a passive defender tag). And the u r visible tagged after using your first module which effects other players. That way you would also get a bit of structure in there.
El Jin'meiko
Warcrows
The Ascendants
#92 - 2013-11-13 09:50:13 UTC
Better than ghost sites.
OkaskiKali
Aussie Carebear OverLords
#93 - 2013-11-13 10:43:56 UTC
Great idea. This sort of gameplay is what is missing from eve e.g. the Roaming Alien fleet mentioned in another post.

Incursions are great for the player that perhaps cannot devote hours upon hours to grind isk since most of the time you can sign in and get in a fleet pretty quickly but Incursions become boring very quickly especially when they are seen as a mechanic that certain communities *cough* ISN should only be for the elitest and all other people need to invest billions of isk to be able to run them.

Back on topic great idea.
Devlin Shardo
Phoenix Connection
#94 - 2013-11-16 20:26:44 UTC
El Jin'meiko wrote:
Better than ghost sites.

Yes it is.
Although i like the fact that you receive damage if you fail a ghost site, the rest of it is meh.
Sorry a bit off-topic there.
I like this idea and it is something much needed in eve. As people have said, to get LoLsec Carebears to join in you need it to be somewhat balanced, but i like the idea. Would be fun to see lowsec versions as well, with it escalating to full on capital fight \o/ .
Will Harold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2013-11-16 20:41:30 UTC
I shall also support this. +1

Big smile
Taiko Igunen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#96 - 2013-11-17 09:38:52 UTC
The reference to coming Rubicon is very much on-topic.

Consider Odyssey's overall theme was *whoo-hoo, get into deep space and explore. What actually happened was that exploration was turned into a pain in the aft. More work for less ISK. Now, what's the theme of the next expansion? Even more exploration.

A really demanding theme would be pvp - a really exciting feature the described "distress calls". Now if you tell me "But boo-hoo, Retribution was all about pvp" -> frakk you, it wasn't. The tagging system was changed, granted, but bounty hunting is still a joke.

It even would compliment CCP's desire for us to get into deep space -> we would have to fight our way through. CCP just needs to make pvp a mandatory thing, let's say a necessity.

Cheers

Taiko

Here's to you, here's to me, friends forever we will be ... and if we ever disagree, f*** you, and here's to me. Cheers!

CCP, give us open pvp: Distress Calls
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#97 - 2013-11-17 20:01:11 UTC
I like the direction this is going.

Now i havent read the previous pages, but perhaps this could be similiar to incursions in the sense that people can "subscribe" to empire emergency broadcasts? With a galaxy so large I imagine theres always a NPC in distress somewhere, you could easily expand this to be mining colonies being raided, caravans under attack, etc, people interested in this kind of work could always find something. It would be almost like missions that just pop up, happena nd are done, some probably resolved one way or another quickly. Get people moving around outside of their comfort zones. has the potential to be much more dynamic than missions.

Event Organizer of EVE North East
Minor Dirt
Doomheim
#98 - 2013-11-25 02:14:14 UTC
I don't see anyway that this could be implemented for WH space but like the idea for K Space quite a bit. +1 from me.
Endovior
PFU Consortium
#99 - 2013-11-25 02:24:28 UTC
I support this idea. More conflict drivers are always welcome.
OptimuzPR
Brothership Of EVE
#100 - 2013-11-25 08:55:04 UTC
+1

Love the concept. Needs to be properly balanced but it seems very interesting indeed.