These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Hard Stripes --Ship Replacement Upgrade
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#41 - 2014-10-17 19:06:47 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Here's an example of the fail that this idea truly is.

I currently have very high standings with caldari navy, resulting from years of running lvl 4 missions. So, I dock in pod, get free battleship, give battleship to corpmate, undock, repeat ad nauseum. Oh look, I've just outfitted a 100-200+ people with free battleships, whicH we then use to go out and engage another similarly outfitted fleet.

Now, your little pipe dream that mission runners who earn those ships having no effect on anything except mission runners and no effect on the market doesn't seem very reasonable now. That little example was several hundred ships not bought off the market, and not unreasonable. Actually, it would be even easier because it takes less tha 2 weeksto grind standings for lvl r missions. I can easily forsee the big alliances creating 50+ alts and grinding enough standing to obtain mass free battleships for their members.

Non transferable.

3rd line of the OP.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#42 - 2014-10-17 19:13:47 UTC
Sigras wrote:
So if I get the post correctly, you want to give me a megathron for free every time I dock because I run gallente level 4 missions and you dont see how this is completely broken?

Nick, usually I can at least see where you're coming from with your posts even if I dont always agree... This time I dont even know...

I want you able to fly a megathron at all times.

I want you fielding doctrines of these, in fact.

I want you leading corp mates in grinding missions, so you can get these ships into their hands too.
(For some reason, others missed the part where I specified these as non transferable)

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Paranoid Loyd
#43 - 2014-10-17 19:28:15 UTC
How are you going to stop them from being used to suicide gank?

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#44 - 2014-10-17 19:34:51 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
How are you going to stop them from being used to suicide gank?

How is anyone being stopped from suicide ganking?

Fit the target so that it is able to withstand the assault, Concord arrives.

These ships should NEVER be a practical means to suicide gank with, as they should never be combat effective enough to overcome a proper defensive fit.

Also, consider that you now have a suicide ganking pilot grinding up to level 4 missions. That is hardly disposable, investing this time and effort.

It would be more cost effective to buy BC hulls, time considered, for suicide ganking ends.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Paranoid Loyd
#45 - 2014-10-17 19:38:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
How are you going to stop them from being used to suicide gank?

How is anyone being stopped from suicide ganking?
Fit the target so that it is able to withstand the assault, Concord arrives.
Did you not understand the question?

Nikk Narrel wrote:

These ships should NEVER be a practical means to suicide gank with, as they should never be combat effective enough to overcome a proper defensive fit.
Are you saying you won't be able to change the fit either?
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Also, consider that you now have a suicide ganking pilot grinding up to level 4 missions. That is hardly disposable, investing this time and effort.
Contrary to popular belief not all suicide alts are trained to disposed of, like me for example.
Nikk Narrel wrote:

It would be more cost effective to buy BC hulls, time considered, for suicide ganking ends.
Grinding missions for an infinite amount of 200 mil isk BS hulls is quite cost effective.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2014-10-17 19:42:31 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
...
I want you able to fly a megathron at all times.

I want you fielding doctrines of these, in fact.

I want you leading corp mates in grinding missions, so you can get these ships into their hands too.
(For some reason, others missed the part where I specified these as non transferable)


And this wouldn't destroy the megathron market??? Or the market for cruisers/BC's people would normally have bought as cheaper alternatives?

+1 for fighting your corner but -severalzillion for the idea :D
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#47 - 2014-10-17 19:54:04 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
-sanipp-
I want you able to fly a megathron at all times.

I want you fielding doctrines of these, in fact.


Aaah and the true problem of yours reveals itself. And the solution to your problem is called SiSi.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#48 - 2014-10-17 20:01:02 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
-sanipp-
I want you able to fly a megathron at all times.

I want you fielding doctrines of these, in fact.


Aaah and the true problem of yours reveals itself. And the solution to your problem is called SiSi.

You want him to go to a test server?

Unless you assume I want this for myself...
I am content with my activities for now, and do not see this benefiting me directly.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Iain Cariaba
#49 - 2014-10-17 20:14:14 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Here's an example of the fail that this idea truly is.

I currently have very high standings with caldari navy, resulting from years of running lvl 4 missions. So, I dock in pod, get free battleship, give battleship to corpmate, undock, repeat ad nauseum. Oh look, I've just outfitted a 100-200+ people with free battleships, whicH we then use to go out and engage another similarly outfitted fleet.

Now, your little pipe dream that mission runners who earn those ships having no effect on anything except mission runners and no effect on the market doesn't seem very reasonable now. That little example was several hundred ships not bought off the market, and not unreasonable. Actually, it would be even easier because it takes less tha 2 weeksto grind standings for lvl r missions. I can easily forsee the big alliances creating 50+ alts and grinding enough standing to obtain mass free battleships for their members.

Non transferable.

3rd line of the OP.

Ok, so new standard for pvp corps is you spend a week grinding lvl 4 standings before you can apply. Still end up with fleets of free battleships rather than ships being bought off the market.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#50 - 2014-10-17 20:20:01 UTC
I like you.
Good questions.
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
How are you going to stop them from being used to suicide gank?

How is anyone being stopped from suicide ganking?
Fit the target so that it is able to withstand the assault, Concord arrives.
Did you not understand the question?

1. Are you saying you won't be able to change the fit either?
2. Contrary to popular belief not all suicide alts are trained to disposed of, like me for example.
3. Grinding missions for an infinite amount of 200 mil isk BS hulls is quite cost effective.


1. Changing the fit was not pointed at directly, BUT that would be an option under the clause of reducing the capability of the ship itself. These are supposed to be ships of last resort, used before walking away from a play session becomes the preferred option.

That is actually a decent suggestion... having a canned fit which is locked in....

2. Non disposable suicide ganking alt. The overhead on your security recovery is probably well considered.
Many suicide alts are disposable, however.

3. Infinite? Your fitting bills would be horrendous...
Seriously though:
A scorp hull runs about 135mill
Apocalypse about 160m
Mega 150m
Tempest 160m


I like that dedicated fitting part... it seems fitting, if you pardon the expression.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#51 - 2014-10-17 20:30:37 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:

Ok, so new standard for pvp corps is you spend a week grinding lvl 4 standings before you can apply. Still end up with fleets of free battleships rather than ships being bought off the market.

The OP has been modified.

Balance would now directly affect which modules were fitted, allowing for canned fits that are predictable by other players.

Good feedback, thank you.

Please consider the revised version with locked fittings, possibly what fittings would be a good last resort ship, without being considered not worth flying at all.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Paranoid Loyd
#52 - 2014-10-17 20:31:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
If I just lost my ship running a mission that was optimally setup (lol at losing ships in missions btw), why would I want to undock in a ship that is nerfed and will probably die again as it is sub-optimal?

Also, I baited you into agreeing with unchangeable fits to point out the only way to make this work is to totally destroy the sandbox elements that being able to determine your fit provides.

The cost to fit a BS hull compared to the gain from using a cruiser would be negligible (~16mil). Your proposal will also provide cruisers right? The cost to fit those for a gank is ~6mil.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#53 - 2014-10-18 14:18:38 UTC
Paranoid Loyd wrote:
If I just lost my ship running a mission that was optimally setup (lol at losing ships in missions btw), why would I want to undock in a ship that is nerfed and will probably die again as it is sub-optimal?

Also, I baited you into agreeing with unchangeable fits to point out the only way to make this work is to totally destroy the sandbox elements that being able to determine your fit provides.

The cost to fit a BS hull compared to the gain from using a cruiser would be negligible (~16mil). Your proposal will also provide cruisers right? The cost to fit those for a gank is ~6mil.

Baited? You first assumed you understood the idea well enough to take it astray.
Totally destroy the sandbox elements?
The sandbox is defined by choices, which remains intact as long as options exist.

You do understand that ADDING a suboptimal ship, specifically for players who have gone to the trouble of building faction standings with a group, doesn't remove anything... ?

When thoughtfully considered, mission runners losing a ship, IN A MISSION, probably is not the point of this idea.
The intent of this is not to put suboptimal ships into missions.
It is to put mission runners into ships, which they have defined a proficiency with that class.
They then can do reckless things, which they would not usually consider risking ISK on.
Hint: This means PvP or going outside of high sec, which they would often disregard as a bad risk otherwise.

Don't fly what you can't afford to lose... ring any bells?
We are dealing with the perception of the individual, who cannot often afford 150 million on a hull, plus another several million on fittings.... all to do something which they too often expect will result in total loss of all ISK spent.

Could bigger players twist it?
Maybe, but why would they even bother?
Considering they could hero fit a more expensive ship, and probably get a dozen killmails off of these lower ISK'ed players, why would they complain about the OPPORTUNITY to play with MORE PLAYERS than they usually saw in their space?

In the end, the sandbox is not about ideals, but about having the most fun in playing a game.
It's a tool, and I feel this idea enhances it.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Iain Cariaba
#54 - 2014-10-18 15:54:27 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:

Ok, so new standard for pvp corps is you spend a week grinding lvl 4 standings before you can apply. Still end up with fleets of free battleships rather than ships being bought off the market.

The OP has been modified.

Balance would now directly affect which modules were fitted, allowing for canned fits that are predictable by other players.

Good feedback, thank you.

Please consider the revised version with locked fittings, possibly what fittings would be a good last resort ship, without being considered not worth flying at all.

The issue with canned fittings is, what is optimal fit for missions? Say my freebie ship is a Raven fit for kin/therm resist to take on Guristas rats in missions. The first drone mission my lvl 4 agent gives me, I'm utterly ****** if I fly that canned fit. Decline mission, ohh look, a second drone mission (this has happened). Now I'm hosed for the next 4 hours.

No matter how many times you try to adjust your idea, it's still a bad idea. You claim this will be a benefit to lvl 4 mission runners who've lost their ship. I say, with years of running missions behind me, that if you lose a ship running a lvl 4 mission, and weren't ganked, then you need to go back to lvl 3s until you learn how to run missions properly. If you were ganked while running a lvl 4 mission, then you need to go back to lvl 3s until you learn how to not be a gank magnet. Either way, you don't need a freebie failfit battleship to encourage further idiocy.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#55 - 2014-10-18 17:53:48 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:

The issue with canned fittings is, what is optimal fit for missions? Say my freebie ship is a Raven fit for kin/therm resist to take on Guristas rats in missions. The first drone mission my lvl 4 agent gives me, I'm utterly ****** if I fly that canned fit. Decline mission, ohh look, a second drone mission (this has happened). Now I'm hosed for the next 4 hours.

No matter how many times you try to adjust your idea, it's still a bad idea. You claim this will be a benefit to lvl 4 mission runners who've lost their ship. I say, with years of running missions behind me, that if you lose a ship running a lvl 4 mission, and weren't ganked, then you need to go back to lvl 3s until you learn how to run missions properly. If you were ganked while running a lvl 4 mission, then you need to go back to lvl 3s until you learn how to not be a gank magnet. Either way, you don't need a freebie failfit battleship to encourage further idiocy.


From the post immediately before yours:

Nikk Narrel wrote:
When thoughtfully considered, mission runners losing a ship, IN A MISSION, probably is not the point of this idea.
The intent of this is not to put suboptimal ships into missions.
It is to put mission runners into ships, which they have defined a proficiency with that class.
They then can do reckless things, which they would not usually consider risking ISK on.
Hint: This means PvP or going outside of high sec, which they would often disregard as a bad risk otherwise.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Iain Cariaba
#56 - 2014-10-18 18:20:48 UTC
No, there is no point to this idea. There should always be risk in EvE. If you wang a game where you can go out, do something stupid, die, then come right back out the same as you were before you died, go play another game. This idea simply does not fit in EvE.
Heresy Heresy
Para's Lumbar Support
Gooseflock Featheration
#57 - 2014-10-18 19:00:10 UTC
Never mind ganking - you could pull up your faction's L5 agents, dock up in each station, and be halfway set to blitz whenever you please. Doesn't matter if you die or even get podded, one mission will pay for at least ten lost ships and their fits. Or maybe they won't, once there's hundreds of faction mindlinks on the market, who knows.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#58 - 2014-10-18 21:53:38 UTC
I could see maybe adding skined variants, and maybe replacing the origional noobship with functionally equivalent (nearly useless, basic frigate sized hulls) of a different faction through FW. Giving any significant upgrade to a free ship is bad. Now, paying in advance with LP to create somewhat spaceworthy frigates on dockup (NOT existing ones, and especially not existing faction frigate) might be a cool mechanic if a dev wants to do most of it in their spare time.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow
#59 - 2014-10-19 00:34:04 UTC
My answer is not only no, but **** no. Not just **** no but also****inglutely not.

I am the One who exists in Shadow. I am the Devil your parents warned you about.

||CEO: Order of the Shadow||Executor: The Revenant Order||Creator: Bowhead||
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#60 - 2014-10-19 04:14:55 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
No, there is no point to this idea. There should always be risk in EvE. If you wang a game where you can go out, do something stupid, die, then come right back out the same as you were before you died, go play another game. This idea simply does not fit in EvE.

Have you seriously become so jaded that you can only recognize the ISK in rISK...?

The time a player spends in the game, is the first and most important stake any of us bet with, or risk, as you might put it.

The player running missions, is playing a very specific game. They are often planning only their next mission ship build, many of which can take most if not all of their resources.
Sidetracking, especially in way that takes both ISK and time, is not attractive to many.

If you want them to try other things, it is in everyone's best interests that the obstacles to their path in this be kept to a minimum.

If they LIKE other areas, then they will have motivation to invest in serious ships, justifying to many more with new spending for play that would not have existed for them otherwise.

This is an investment, not a loss.
The benefit to the game outweighs any loss of make-believe currency.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...