Player Features and Ideas Discussion

One of those "imminent games" is vaporware, a lie and never actually going to be finished.

Another of those "imminent games" is completely different from EVE and very very instanced with lots of protection against PvP.

Also, what about the people who play EVE because we like the way it is now?

I, for one, welcome our ocean going battleships flown by naval aviators from a cockpit.

Soooooooo... lemme run down the list of problems and see if you can address them OP.

- Real space physics is a ***** to fly in.
--- because in space there is no speed limit (except for that of light), bigger ships will have no limits on how fast they can go... effectively making smaller craft obsolete unless you need that maneuverability (which will be the only advantage they will have).
--- fighting will become, at best, tedious simply because it will be almost impossible to stay at close range to people unless you come to a near standstill (due to the aforementioned speed issues).
---- to make this fully work....
-------- you would have to revamp the backend physics engine... which last I check is no small feat. You will be effectively making a new game.
-------- you have to rebalance all the ships. And their weapons. Because the turret tracking mechanics would be useless with real space physics. The only things that would really work would be long range missile combat.

- Manual control (as in, using a joystick) does not work. The server receives, processes, and sends out every command you give to a ship once a second (one "tick" or "hertz"). The reason it does this is so that it is possible to have dozens, upon, dozens, upon hundreds of people in the same area without the server crashing from excessive I/O.
There is a reason that FPS games and even the much anticipated Star Citizen will only be able to support ~100 or less people in a single server. They require server "ticks" in the order of milliseconds to give the responsiveness people want.


Define "superior."


Look... let us be realistic here. What EVE offers is more of a "real time strategy" and "as-close-to-a-real-sandbox-as-possible" experience. Except for Ultima Online, no other game in history has ever offered up such a combination.
In order to accomplish this feat, EVE has had to make some sacrifices... notably the 1 hz server refresh rate, Time Dilation, and less-than-realistic physics (because people intuitively understand it better than Zero-G).

What is Star Citizen offering promising? Well... it's not EVE. From what I can tell... it is a single player experience with the option to have private servers and/or dogfighting type stuff a la EVE Valkyrie (which is admittedly looking like vaporware itself).
SC is pretty... do not get me wrong... but do not think for a second it can deliver on everything without making some compromises (either on purpose or as a result).
- If too many people make private servers, the interconnected/persistent world will suffer.

- If you want to have dogfighting, you have to limit how many people and what kind of people can join in a fight (it is twitch gameplay... only the people with the best connections, computers, and reflexes will have any value).

- If you want "sandbox" style gameplay then you have to accept that some players will behave in a fashion that other players will hate (or even ragequit over). Remember that "multi-player sandboxes," by definition, make everything in the in-game world PvP.
If you nerf or ban that kind of gameplay on the principle of "everyone should be allowed to do what they want to do without interference" then you no longer have a "sandbox" and are instead being a hypocrite.

- If you want to have RL physics then you have to make the world and speeds you can attain MUCH more compact/smaller so it is possible to interact, much less shoot a person... which is not realistic at all because space is HUGELY, MASSIVELY, BIG and everything goes INSANELY FAST (for example: Voyager II is moving at 15,428 m/s... now try firing a projectile from a ship going at that speed at another ship going at that speed perpendicular to you 1000+ kms away... which is about 1% of 1% of the average distance between of asteroids in the asteroid belt of our solar system).

Like its sad I know, and I would love a good, HARD sim space combat game. But it would never cut it as a multiplayer game, much less an MMO.
Assuming no jump drives. Most of the game would be maneuvering to get intercepts with enemies, worrying about your Delta-V to get back to base. Battles would be short and vicious, or slow and draining (just depends on the damage model)
Perhaps a game with jumping, and a slightly ~average view of the physics of space (perhaps orbital mechanics only matter when at low altitudes, and full newtonian physics work might be doable) but then you'll just be jumping from gate to gate fighting... like in Eve.

Lorewize aren't most naval/pirate ships manned by hundreds to thousands of crewman and conned from the bridges inherent in most ships?

Actually, the ones we use still have a crew. The larger ships have quite a few crew.

Just because game A is doing something that looks cool doesn't mean game B has to do it as well.

EVE is not a first-person flight sim. In terms of combat, it is more a pseudo-turn-based strategy game than an action game. Manual flight would either be gimmicky or completely change core game mechanics.

You can do that with some fiddling of the mouse-keyboard input... or even joystick to keyboard input. But it would be like playing flight simulator at 1 frame per second.

Again, there are reasons why the server "ticks" so slow. It works for EVE.


Again... define what is "best." Because that means something different to everyone.



Look... I am not saying EVE should not grow and evolve... but it doesn't mean EVE should try to be like everyone else. Some mechanics and styles of gameplay are, by definition, mutually exclusive. You can try to balance them out... but something invariably gets lost in the process and ultimately will lose out in favor of another game that caters specifically to a certain style of gameplay.

EVE caters to people who like to be cutthroat commanders, strategists, libertarians/anarchists, and morally questionable industrialists... not so much FPS people. There isn't a problem with that.

Would we be talking about Star Citizien. This game has a 50/50 chance of release or being a crowd source scam and they walk off with with early access money. I am betting they steal the cash and laugh while doing it. But if they don't....what abut a game that even in testing is so heavily dependent on p2w is appealing to you?

I am in few beta's and alpha.s and they don't hit me up for cash often. And if in say prison architect I wanted to give them more money...all I get is prisoner bio I can call my own. Cosmetic items...what pay the devs' extra should do. SC...has it so even this years beta testers can't get the same p2w ships last year were offered. You seriously think this p2w cluster **** will clear out for release. It can't...it will get worse. Cause now the new non-beta need their nice rides.

And a corp that tore down because of WOT....was going to implode anyway. I know of a few eve players who can play both. Goons is in WOT. So are others like PL, reddit based crews, etc.. WoT did not dismantle them in eve. Quite a few nights I even saw an obvious fw player in WoT matches. The spamming of amarr victor gave them away.

Wanna know our secret to play 2 games....its called DT in the oceanic/asia timezone. Some cry about it. Some like me go play wot. bang out daily doubles on tanks I care about, come back to eve when done.

asking eve to become a ship simulator game would be like asking Sid Meier Civilization to become a first person fps.
maybe it would work but that's a completely different game targeted to completely different kind of players.
why ccp should close eve to make this new game?