These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Azami Nevinyrall for CSM9!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#61 - 2014-04-05 19:09:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
Kasumi 'Goto wrote:
Can you go into further detail on the kinds of changes you would like to see made to pve, Jove space, FW, Incarna and carriers in highsec. These have been of great interest to me for a long time so i am really curious to hear your ideas.

Thanks

I have discussed this before, but I'll happily do it again!

PVE - More missions, different types and dangers, more mission hubs, randomized mission NPCs. For example: Each spawn is randomized with a random trigger. Have the NPC DPS always be the same, no matter what spawns in the wave. So you could have 5 BS's spawn or 50 frigates, or a mix of in between.

Jove Space - To grasp this fully you'll need to have a good understanding of the lore and its history. I'm going to safely assume you know all about this!

So, after the "Farming" of Sleeper brains stopped, The Sleepers are INSANELY pissed off at the Amarr and Jove. Sleepers invade Jove space, Jove asks Capsuleers to help defined them.

On and FYI, for wormhole guys who think sleepers are easy simply because they kill them all day. Those are just the automated defense drones, Sleepers themselves are ******* batshit scary.

Let's compare ships for a moment shall we?

Us players, use camera drones to see around us and outside our ships. Jove, they don't use drones...Imagine your eye is stretched and wrapped around the hull and you can see everything around you. Sleepers...goes a little further... they can see EVERYTHING around them in full 3D....at once...In perfect clarity.

FW - Could use some fine tuning, rid the farms and fields and introduce Pirate Factions to the mix. In lowsec have missions actually worth doing. Even if its hiring Mercs to protect your blinged out ship.

Carriers in highsec - I never really understood why this was removed. But, I'm willing to bet it was valid and an easy fix to something else. I'd like to see them return, but have them so "Capital modules" cannot be used in highsec, neither can fighters and bombers. Limit the amount of drones they can use in highsec. Basically, a big Battleship!

...
Kasumi 'Goto
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2014-04-06 02:56:40 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
Kasumi 'Goto wrote:
Can you go into further detail on the kinds of changes you would like to see made to pve, Jove space, FW, Incarna and carriers in highsec. These have been of great interest to me for a long time so i am really curious to hear your ideas.

Thanks

I have discussed this before, but I'll happily do it again!

PVE - More missions, different types and dangers, more mission hubs, randomized mission NPCs. For example: Each spawn is randomized with a random trigger. Have the NPC DPS always be the same, no matter what spawns in the wave. So you could have 5 BS's spawn or 50 frigates, or a mix of in between.

Jove Space - To grasp this fully you'll need to have a good understanding of the lore and its history. I'm going to safely assume you know all about this!

So, after the "Farming" of Sleeper brains stopped, The Sleepers are INSANELY pissed off at the Amarr and Jove. Sleepers invade Jove space, Jove asks Capsuleers to help defined them.

On and FYI, for wormhole guys who think sleepers are easy simply because they kill them all day. Those are just the automated defense drones, Sleepers themselves are ******* batshit scary.

Let's compare ships for a moment shall we?

Us players, use camera drones to see around us and outside our ships. Jove, they don't use drones...Imagine your eye is stretched and wrapped around the hull and you can see everything around you. Sleepers...goes a little further... they can see EVERYTHING around them in full 3D....at once...In perfect clarity.

FW - Could use some fine tuning, rid the farms and fields and introduce Pirate Factions to the mix. In lowsec have missions actually worth doing. Even if its hiring Mercs to protect your blinged out ship.

Carriers in highsec - I never really understood why this was removed. But, I'm willing to bet it was valid and an easy fix to something else. I'd like to see them return, but have them so "Capital modules" cannot be used in highsec, neither can fighters and bombers. Limit the amount of drones they can use in highsec. Basically, a big Battleship!


Thanks for your response! Many of your ideas seem similar to mine. I hope you make it into CSM.
Rhingda BatFone
Isk Dodgers
#63 - 2014-04-06 08:41:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Rhingda BatFone
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:


I never said that cloaking itself is unbalanced, but the fact that there isn't a counter against it that makes it unbalanced.


You are reading this in my voice...



Isn't the fact that you can't activate any modules while cloaked and the fact you can't move very fast or warp in anything other than a glass tank covops ship the balance for the cloak?
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#64 - 2014-04-06 10:21:36 UTC
@Kasumi 'Goto

Thank you!

I hope I get in too!

...
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#65 - 2014-04-06 10:49:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
Rhingda BatFone wrote:
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:


I never said that cloaking itself is unbalanced, but the fact that there isn't a counter against it that makes it unbalanced.


You are reading this in my voice...



Isn't the fact that you can't activate any modules while cloaked and the fact you can't move very fast or warp in anything other than a glass tank covops ship the balance for the cloak?


Ok, the wording there is absolutely horrible....my wording, not yours! I've learned a lot the past few weeks and I've had the opportunity to talk to a number of people. People is expressing their concern over this because they don't want this aspect of gameplay completely ruined.

If your in any Covops you move just as fast cloaked or uncloaked. No targeting delay when you uncloak is good. Being able to target or activate mods while cloaked would be OP. It also depends on how you fit your ship and skills. It's also a frigate, don't expect anymore then 8k ehp.

Now then, this is my heavily revised idea for covert ops.

The Counter:
A new destroyer ship class, to give a tech 2 variant of the new destroyers. They would have a specialized probe launcher and probes, akin to the Interdictor. Exactly how these probes would work is completely up for debate. Either scanning or local disruption. I like the scanning option!

The Balance:
Keep the module and ships the same, you don't really need to touch those mechanics. But, add a new layer.

With the new Destroyer, Covert Ops pilots would have a "Enhanced Cloaking" skill book added to the game. Where each level would make them harder to scan down by 20% per level. At level 5 in a Covert Ops ship, regardless of the Destroyer pilots scanning skills. Would be impossible (or next to impossible) to find or even see. This would only apply to Covert/Black OPS and T3 with the subsystem ships.

On non-Covert Ops ships it would be easier...much easier to find. The level of difficulty would depend on ship class and module used. For example, a Titan with a Tech 1 Cloak would light up like a Christmas tree. A Noob-Ship with a officer/deadspace cloak would be a candle.

Dedicated Covert Ops pilots already have their cloaking skill maxed. It would be safe to say that your average/part-time Covert Ops pilot won't spent the time training the enhanced skill to its max.

...
Ally Poo
Stars Eclipse
#66 - 2014-04-07 17:46:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ally Poo
I don't even care about anything else...

Name changes and SP relocation? You had me at hello.

I'd pay big Isk or cash for any/both of these.

For name changes I understand keeping the identity of people, intact... for many and various reasons. Just have a "formally known as" tab on the said persons show info. Keep the amount of name changes locked like the neural remaps and lock the former name from being used again by someone else... Forever.

As for SP relocation I think something along the lines of reduced value. Like going from level 5 to 4 you get 50% of the total SP's back that was required from going to level 4 to 5. Then 60% 4 to 3... 70%... 80%... 90%... Something like that.

I am just an old player who have changed what I do eve therefore would love to just get rid of old useless skills that I don't need or have an alt for. CCP could go even further and add a medical Bay in the captains quarters to see a visualization of your neural mind of SP changing as a creepy spider like robot above your head pokes you or something like the plugs in the matrix that go in the already holes in our neck.

I think it is a step in the right direction for bringing back old players and keeping the old one around. Or even newer players that have made a mistake in something they have trained or a regretful name (like myself). Of course changing your name or getting SP's back would come at a cost. Either that cost be Isk, Micro-Cash, Loss of SP's, LP's or nothing is up to CCP.

That's just my two cents. I am aware that these are not game changing or ground breaking or something like omg yes or omg please no. For this doesn't appeal to some or a lot of players but who knows. I am for one looking forward to see the CSM race and would love to hear your thoughts on this and/or your ideas on SP relocation and name changes.

I typed this on my phone so I apologize if anything doesn't make sense.

Good luck. Got my vote for now.

RNEST - Providing one way tickets to the red mist society.
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#67 - 2014-04-07 19:38:14 UTC
Thanks Ally Poo!

I would personally love to see these for myself too!

The name change would be HUGE in the character bazaar. If anything, a cool down for this would be good. Like once per year or two! Not game breaking, CCP already does this with naughty names. So it REALLY shouldn't be hard to implement.

SP remap, is a little tough. After a few convos with a GM one day, they said its impossible to remove skills with SP already committed. But, I believe this would be worth every penny. I have 2 characters I'd use this service on right now if it became available. But this one should be heavily restricted to 1 in your lifetime!

Non game breaking "Micro transactions" I'm in support of. And I can tell CCP is looking at this topic again, I'd love the opportunity to sit down with CCP and discuss this. Also, I'd approach the community and see what they would like.

...
Ryneles
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#68 - 2014-04-08 22:59:06 UTC
I'd like to spell out my dislikes of cloakiness and cloakie camping, as there've been about a dozen comments and questions about it. I am not running for office, but as of now, will support Azami based on her willingness to raise these concerns.

I'm not trying to convince anyone I'm exactly right, here. Everyone is welcome to their opinion. This is mine.

You all suck.

That was a joke. :P

There is no reasonable counter to cloakiness, as Azami has said. Should there be? I believe so. One comment was (paraphrased), "Well, so what if you don't know if they are afk or not. It adds some risk to the encounter."

However, it adds risk unilaterally, as there is virtually no risk whatsoever to the cloaker. None at all, regardless of whether they are afk or not. AFK campers do not add any enjoyment to Eve whatsoever.

What they do, though, is generate revenue for CCP. A cloaky camper who is AFK can shut down a system, as I've seen more than once in my home systems over the last several months. Folks that aren't mining and aren't ratting aren't making ISK, and so they turn to PLEX purchases and sales to make up the difference. Even if it only shuts it down for an hour or so while people are getting a feel for whether the person is afk, it's still an impact, and they add up over time.

I'm not against cloakiness. I'm against a game mechanic, though, that disrupts the in-game economy and has no counter whatsoever. And that has no cost at all.

I'd like to see either some way to add risk to the cloaker (afk or otherwise), or to otherwise prevent afk cloakiness.

One thought someone shared with me was random "pulses," perhaps once a day, in each system that decloaks all ships. You can AFK if you like, but you don't know if the next pulse is 20 min from now, or 20 hours.

On the Hunter-Killer front that Azami had mentioned, I see this as an opportunity for CCP as well. Active players that are cloaked wouldn't be strongly affected by this, especially if they have a way to determine if they are being hunted.

On the Hunter-Killer front, you could make it expensive, either up front, or as a renewable cost (like missiles, etc.). This would potentially open up a new in-game career--merc groups that sell their services to remove your cloaky-infestation. Again, an active player doesn't have much to worry about--they can move around, and otherwise be difficult to nail down. This would adversely affect those that are AFK.

I realize this isn't ideal to everyone, and that many don't have a problem with the current mechanic. But, many do.
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#69 - 2014-04-08 23:48:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
Ryneles wrote:
I'd like to spell out my dislikes of cloakiness and cloakie camping, as there've been about a dozen comments and questions about it. I am not running for office, but as of now, will support Azami based on her willingness to raise these concerns.

I'm not trying to convince anyone I'm exactly right, here. Everyone is welcome to their opinion. This is mine.

You all suck.

That was a joke. :P

There is no reasonable counter to cloakiness, as Azami has said. Should there be? I believe so. One comment was (paraphrased), "Well, so what if you don't know if they are afk or not. It adds some risk to the encounter."

However, it adds risk unilaterally, as there is virtually no risk whatsoever to the cloaker. None at all, regardless of whether they are afk or not. AFK campers do not add any enjoyment to Eve whatsoever.

What they do, though, is generate revenue for CCP. A cloaky camper who is AFK can shut down a system, as I've seen more than once in my home systems over the last several months. Folks that aren't mining and aren't ratting aren't making ISK, and so they turn to PLEX purchases and sales to make up the difference. Even if it only shuts it down for an hour or so while people are getting a feel for whether the person is afk, it's still an impact, and they add up over time.

I'm not against cloakiness. I'm against a game mechanic, though, that disrupts the in-game economy and has no counter whatsoever. And that has no cost at all.

I'd like to see either some way to add risk to the cloaker (afk or otherwise), or to otherwise prevent afk cloakiness.

One thought someone shared with me was random "pulses," perhaps once a day, in each system that decloaks all ships. You can AFK if you like, but you don't know if the next pulse is 20 min from now, or 20 hours.

On the Hunter-Killer front that Azami had mentioned, I see this as an opportunity for CCP as well. Active players that are cloaked wouldn't be strongly affected by this, especially if they have a way to determine if they are being hunted.

On the Hunter-Killer front, you could make it expensive, either up front, or as a renewable cost (like missiles, etc.). This would potentially open up a new in-game career--merc groups that sell their services to remove your cloaky-infestation. Again, an active player doesn't have much to worry about--they can move around, and otherwise be difficult to nail down. This would adversely affect those that are AFK.

I realize this isn't ideal to everyone, and that many don't have a problem with the current mechanic. But, many do.


I REALLY enjoy open-mindedness like this!

Regardless if I get in the CSM or not, I'm happy to see the conversation is active in the community. Devs are paying attention to these threads and one or two might take note. There is no bad ideas when brainstorming any thought!

Please keep this idea alive, it looks like this idea is a very popular solution...

...